BLOG

Jake Tapper Doesn’t Back Down From Asking FL Sheriff the Tough Questions

What’s going on?

Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel seemed certain when he debated NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch in a CNN town hall last week and advocated for police officers to get more control and power to take away guns from people. But in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday, Israel revealed how little he knew about the school shooting in Parkland, Florida before he appeared in the town hall.

Remind me:

Seventeen people died when a shooter opened fire in Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Feb. 14. As teenage survivors advocate for gun control, investigators and journalists are pointing out more and more red flags that show the shooting suspect should not have been able to keep his gun.

The Broward County Sheriff’s Office is being investigated for not acting on a tip that the teenage gunman could be a “school shooter in the making.” Israel’s office reportedly received 18 calls about the shooter before the tragic incident.

Glenn’s take:

The office heard about the “school shooter in the making” in advance and did nothing. As we learn about the sheriff’s department’s incompetence, we should be even more leery of handing over more control.

“He wanted more law enforcement power. That should always scare people,” Glenn said. “What are you doing with the power that you do have?”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: All right. So I want to talk to you about the school shooting and where we go from here, but I want to do it with this in mind: If it meant -- if it meant that we could stop all shootings, would you consider an infringement on your Second Amendment right? If it meant?

To me, the answer is yes. But I know the evidence shows that it doesn't work. So no.

If you could show me real evidence that this was an outdated mode of thinking and that, you know, we had somehow or another solved the reason why you should have guns in the first place, and that is against tyranny, and you need it for self-protection, well, then you could talk me into it.

But I've never seen that evidence. I've looked for that evidence. But I'm open to hearing new evidence. Share away.

If you are on the other side and I could show you evidence that we could do a few things beside not taking away guns and it was effective, would you change your mind? Would you say, well, let's start there.

And for both sides. If we could get to a place to where I could just say, look, you know, we want to have this gun debate, that's fine. But this is one of the oldest debates in American history. What is a militia? So we're not going to solve this in the next couple of weeks.

Do we all believe that more -- that more shooting is coming?

I think it's safe to say that, yes, we all know that. Okay. So what are we going to do to solve it? Well, the first thing is, what can we learn from this shooting? What can we learn from the last shooting?

We learned in the last shooting, in the church, that, A, somebody who is just a civilian with a firearm can stop the shooting. But we also learned that the Air Force was not reporting people with mental health issues or issues with guns and domestic abuse, to put them in the system.

That had to be changed. Now, what have we learned on this one? Well, I think one thing that we've learned is there's something wrong with this sheriff. There's something wrong -- deeply wrong in Broward County. It's one thing to have one guy that stays out of the building and waits while the shooting was going on. But there were four sheriff deputies.

STU: He denies that. Although, his denial has lots of -- you know, qualifications to it. Which maybe we'll hear some of that here in this interview.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: But I think, you know, there's also the thing of, what do you learn from this mass shooting. And one of the things, I think, when you're leading up to the mass shooting, is if every citizen in America has told you that one specific person is going to do a school shooting, that might be a time to understand that perhaps, that person is in danger of doing a school shooting.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Maybe you should do something about that.

GLENN: When you have the number of reports and the number of altercations with this student that they did, and the sheriff's department did nothing, that's a problem. That's a real problem. And that's easy to fix. Let's make sure that's not happening anyplace else. Let's discuss this. And get to the bottom of it.

Jake Tapper started unraveling this hero sheriff's story over the weekend. And let's start with, why was there no report when they called and said, he's going to be a school shooter. He's a school shooter in the making. And he has access to guns.

Why was there no report? Listen.

JAKE: Fewer than three months ago, your office received a call from a tipster explicitly saying that crews could be a, quote, school shooter in the making. According to notes released on that call, no report was even initiated.

At this point, sir, do you understand how the public, seeing red flag after red flag after red flag, warning after warning after warning, they hear that your office didn't even initiate a report when they got a call saying that this guy could be a school shooter in the making? How could there not even be a report on this one?

VOICE: Well, if that's accurate, Jake, there needed to be a report. And that's what we're looking into, that a report needed to be completed. It needed to be reported to either our Homeland Security or violent crimes unit. And they would have followed up on it.

JAKE: That's from your notes. That's from notes released by your office. I'm not making this up. This is from Broward.

VOICE: No, and that's -- and that's what -- the officer who handled that is on restrictive duty. And we are -- that's an active internal investigation. And we're looking into it.

GLENN: Okay. So there's another person under his command that has failed to do the job.

Yet, he wanted more law enforcement power. That should always scare people.

What are you doing with the power that you do have? But he's been asking for more power.

Listen.

VOICE: The whole crux of this is giving law enforcement, giving deputies, giving police officers, not only in Broward County, but in Florida and around the nation, expanded power, to be able to do something more than just write a report. That's the whole reason I went on CNN and town hall --

VOICE: Sir, isn't making a threat against the school a crime?

VOICE: Not if the person doesn't have the ability to carry it out. You could say a nonspecific threat, I'm going to go to a school. It's not a crime. If the person doesn't have the apparent ability to carry it out, it's not a crime.

JAKE: Well, in September 2016, the shooter indicated that he wanted to buy a gun. Deputy Peterson knew about that. He initiated the report. The school launched a threat assessment.

At this point, you have somebody saying that they're going to shoot up a school and somebody with a gun. That's not enough?

VOICE: That's not enough.

GLENN: That's not enough. Huh.

STU: And that's just one of the incidents. Of course, there's dozens.

GLENN: Is that true?

STU: His first answer is, do they have the ability to carry it out?

GLENN: Yes. Wait. You're using reason.

STU: Okay. Should I calm down?

GLENN: You should calm down. Stop using reason. Let's just jump on his side or against him, depending on what our religion tells us to do.

STU: That's true.

GLENN: This is the problem. This is the problem.

So reason would tell you, well, let's stop here. Let's stop here. Is that true?

Now, we know that's not true. We know that's not true. There was a paper trail, very long against this kid.

So you obviously have enough power to make sure that he is not around guns, to make sure that he gets some sort of medical treatment, et cetera, et cetera. Whatever it is.

You may not be able to throw him in prison, but you certainly can restrict him, with all of the stuff that we had. So we know that's not true.

If it was true, that should be the first thing the sheriff is asking for. Right there. Here's specifics. I had 31, you know, complaints against this guy. Nineteen of them, we did exactly right.

Okay. We'll get back to the others that you didn't get right. But on those 19, I couldn't do anything. And we knew he had a gun. We knew that he was holding it to people's heads who he knew. That he was threatening to shoot up the school. And, "We couldn't do anything." We know that's not true.

But if it is true or if it were true, that should be the first thing we work on. Don't you think? Because there has to be other schools and other sheriffs that are facing the same thing.

I know this kid is going to go and do something, because of the 19 reports that we have. But I can't do anything.

We should hear from those sheriffs. We should know. Let us help you protect the children.

All right. Next cut.

When did he know about Peterson? I love this one.

JAKE: When did you find out that Deputy Peterson had not gone into the building? How soon after the shooting did you know that?

VOICE: Not for days. We --

JAKE: How many days?

VOICE: Our investigators looked -- I'm not sure.

JAKE: Because you spent much of the Wednesday night town hall on CNN with the entire Stoneman Douglas community, students and teachers and parents attacking the NRA, saying the police needed more powers, more money, to prevent future tragedies.

You didn't disclose any of this to the crowd then, the stone man Douglas High School community. Did you know it then? Did you know it Wednesday night?

VOICE: It was spoken about during that -- earlier, during that day. I'm not a time line for TV or any news show. We need to get it right. We need to get it accurate. We're talking about people's lives. We're talking about a community. We need to corroborate. We need to verify. And once we did, the next day -- and I looked at the tape, and I was 100 percent certain that it happened the way I was told about the investigators initially told about. I didn't even release it that second.

JAKE: You didn't look at the video -- one week after the shooting, you hadn't looked at the video yet?

VOICE: I looked at the video as soon as the investigators -- it wasn't my job to look at the video. It was investigators' job to look at the video. I'm still sheriffing this -- this -- this -- this county. There were many things to do. We have investigators -- homicide investigators, internal affairs investigators dissecting it. And when they felt there was a video ready for my view, that I might take action on one of our deputies, I looked at the video.

STU: I mean, if you believe this guy hadn't seen that video before that town hall in a week's time --

GLENN: Then he needs to be dismissed as incompetent just for that.

STU: I mean, there's tons of things that I would love to sell you.

But the other thing is, can you imagine -- forget even if he saw the video. He tells you there that he knew about it going on stage.

Can you imagine the balls to go on stage on national television, and yell at Dana Loesch and say that she's not standing up for these kids, when you know that your deputy was actually not standing up, he was crouching behind a wall, while people were being executed inside the school. Can you imagine the balls to go on television and not bring that up?

GLENN: Now, listen to this. Listen to this idea.

STU: That's incredible.

GLENN: Let's just fix reason firmly in her seat. And let's use his logic. He doesn't want to go on television. Because there's a crowd there. It's a community. It's a community that's grieving.

And he wants to make sure, you just don't go in front of that community, in front of that crowd, unless he can verify everything and he's 100 percent sure, that that's what happened.

So he was 100 percent sure that the NRA caused this shooting? He's 100 percent sure that it was the gun and not the kid?

He was 1 percent sure, even though, he had evidence presented to him, that things could have been different if -- not one. But four of his deputies would have moved in. He was 100 percent sure that it was the NRA's fault. But he wouldn't bring anything -- he wouldn't bring anything about his group, unless he was 100 percent sure. And he just wasn't -- he wasn't there. But he was so sure that the people who weren't there, were at fault.

I don't -- I don't understand that. That doesn't seem like you're really doing an investigation. That seems like a witch hunt.

STU: Well, and he did want to let that fact out in front of the families, in a public forum. He wanted to do it one-on-one. He wanted to make sure that was one-on-one.

GLENN: I know. I know. Well, he did the very next morning in a press conference. So he didn't do it one-on-one.

STU: Hmm. He just put it out on a press release, talked to reporters about it.

GLENN: Yeah. Talked to reporters. But in this interview with Jake Tapper, one of the reasons why he didn't do it was because -- you just didn't tell people like that in a crowd or just an impersonal forum, like the town hall. You needed to -- you know, there was one parent that wasn't there. And he wanted to make sure everybody was there so he could personally tell them.

STU: So all of the parents were there at a press release? That's interesting.

GLENN: Press conference. No. No. It's strange, isn't it?

STU: You let that crowd attack Dana Loesch, calling her a murderer and all these other terrible things. It was mob -- it was Christians and lions, as you've been talking about it. I mean, absolute mob.

And you knew, as you were sitting on that stage and -- and making it worse by putting more blame on her and the NRA, you knew your own deputy -- you were going to fire him the next day for dereliction of duty because he didn't go in there. You, your judgment of it, his actions are so bad, and you don't even bring that up. In fact, you make it worse. You make people go after her. You make her life be threatened. That is an incomprehensible -- this guy makes it through this thing with his job, that is -- I don't even -- there is absolutely no justice.

GLENN: I will tell you that during -- during the town hall, during the town hall, CNN people wondered if Dana and others had security to be able to get them out. They've started to worry about the guest security.

Wow. Wow. Huh. I know I felt that way. But it's strange to hear CNN might have felt that way. And yet, they continued to go.

RADIO

THIS proves who REALLY rules the world

The Department of Energy is preparing to finance up to 10 nuclear power plants to help the development of AI. Glenn Beck is both thrilled and furious. Glenn explains why this energy issue reveals who really rules the world.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So Chris Wright, our energy secretary, told an exclusive interview with the Free Beacon. That the Department of Energy, under Donald Trump is preparing to finance up to ten nuclear power plants, to give us a renaissance of nuclear energy. I have to tell you, I am both thrilled about this, and a little pissed. And maybe it's just me.

But we've been talking about nuclear energy since I was a little kid. We've known that nuclear energy was the answer since the 1950s. But we've not wanted to do it. And there's been all kinds of protests. And you all kinds of lefties that are out. Saying, oh, you can't do that. You'll kill everybody on the planet. In the meantime, we've not built nuclear energy plants. Okay? Haven't built them. We have reinvented them.

We have -- we have reinvented them. We made them small. There's no China Syndrome. Nothing else.

But they've been there for a while now. Still can't do it. Oh, the planet is going to catch on fire soon! It's going to be so hot. We're all going to die. Nuclear energy, which has zero emissions. No, can't do that. Because maybe. Possibly, what if? Even though, it's the safest energy man has ever produced. Let me say that again.
It is the safest energy man has ever produced. But you can't have it. I can't have it. I need energy for my house. I need energy for my office. No. You don't get it.

Sorry, try a windmill. But that doesn't work. Well, it worked when it was windy.

Okay. But now that AI -- now that these giant corporations need the energy. And there's no way for them to make the energy fast enough, and big enough, all of a sudden, green lights are everywhere.

Notice, nobody is talking about, we can't have all these nuclear power plants. We can't do that. Ten nuclear power plants.

Are now being green lighted and financed by our Treasury Department. Okay? Which is a good thing. If we don't have energy, we lose all of it. All of it. These -- these server farms have to have energy. And I warn you, gang, if we don't build them, what's going to happen?

Do you really think that you're going to get the power, that ace hardware is going to get the power over a Home Depot?

Do you think your house is going to get the power over a Google server?

Nope. They will start rationing for everyone else, to put all of it into the server farms. I guarantee you, that's what's going to happen.

So this is really, really good for the American people.

But, again, like I said, I'm kind of pissed. Because my whole right after, I've believed in nuclear energy.

And everybody has been against it. How many Chernobyl movies do we need to make?

How many lies about Chernobyl do we have to hear?

How many lies do we have to hear about what happened in Japan?

Or, my favorite: Three Mile Island.
No one died! No one died! Stu, wasn't that just steam that was let out, with such low emissions that it didn't affect anything, in Three Mile Island.

People quoted that forever.

STU: Yeah. The maximum radiation released was the equivalent of a chest x-ray.

Maximum exposure.

GLENN: And that stopped everything. That stopped everything!

That happened, and that movie, by Jane Fonda, the China syndrome. Which, by the way, was really good. The China syndrome came out, at the same time.

And everyone said no, to nuclear energy. And can you imagine, if we had nuclear energy, right now. How far ahead we would be?

Can you imagine? I can guarantee you, we would be using hydrogen cars right now. Because hydrogen can be made in the off hours. You have these nuclear power plants. When everybody goes to bed. They just keep the plant running. Instead of turning it down, they keep it running at a high level. And you can make hydrogen for cars, all night long.

Oh, my gosh. It's so frustrating.

It just -- it just goes to show you, who actually rules the world.

Is it you?

Or the giant corporations?

It's the giant corporations.

And it's really -- I hate -- I hate coming to that realization.

You know, I would like living in my little utopian world where everything was happy.

Everybody was like, oh, you know what, you know what, we're really good. No. We're the Constitution, republic, people listen to us.

Our politicians react to us.

GLENN: No. They really don't. They really don't.

But they can. They can. We just have to say, enough is enough. Enough is enough.

And believe me, anything that they can do to be able to shut you down and control you, and what is the best way to control people?
What's the best way to control people?

What's the absolute positively, I can control everything you do?

If I can control three or four things.

Your food. Your medicine.

Your energy. Hmm. And your money.

Because if I have your money, I can control where you buy food. What you buy. I can -- I can control where you travel to, how you travel. Oh, sorry. You can't go on an airplane, too dirty for you.

Leonardo DiCaprio needs that. Because he will give a speech about global warming. So we'll give him your credit, so you don't have it.

They control your money. If they control your food. If they control your medicine, are you -- are you noticing a trend?

I mean, everything that is happening here. They're killing our farmers.

There's your food.

They're just slaughtering our farmers. You know, metaphorically. Our farmers are going out of business. Our ranchers.

There's no reason.

We used to be the breadbasket of the entire world.

Why aren't we still?

Well, because we had to play in the global atmosphere. I don't want to play in the global atmosphere anymore.

I don't believe in all that crap.

I'll sell it to the globe. But why are we taking it in the shorts? Our people are hurting. We're buying our food, which we used to make here. We're buying it for overseas. And our farmers are going out of business. All this farmland, and who is gobbling it up?

Who is gobbling it up?

People like Bill Gates!

These giant industrial farms, okay.

And if they can control your electricity, already, I think it's in Mexico.

I know it's South America. I think it's in Mexico. They're already having problems. Some of these server farms. They're already having rolling brownouts in some towns in Mexico, just to keep the servers going, and if your servers run everything, can you imagine, you're on the east coast. Your servers start to go down. Do you think that because our entire economy -- our -- our whole system of money, banking, the stock market. Everything. It's all on server farms. No. It has to have. That's priority. That's priority.

It will be priority for that. Maybe hospitals, unless they just want to continue to reduce the surplus population to quote Scrooge.

But it will all go to the server farms. Before it goes to your farm and your house. Guarantee it. So good news, I guess, on that one.

The New York Times. This makes me so nervous. Wait, Stu. Why did you make that face?

GLENN: I mean, I get what you're saying, in theory, this electricity might go to sources that, you know, benefit from, but problem is nuclear energy.

It's basically unlimited.

You know, it is --

GLENN: These are smaller. These are smaller plants. These are -- these are designed for the server farms, not for the public.

STU: I -- I -- I agree with that. But I -- I don't know. I kind of take it as closer to proof of concept than anything else.

GLENN: Me too. Me too.

STU: If they dump money into these things, and they're successful, and there aren't massive problems, which all of these things I think would be the expectation, I think that there's a chance -- we might -- we might have a world that is not that far away. We have relatively cheap energy in perpetuity.

I mean, that's a massive promise and worth a little bit of risk of some of this stuff going to the wrong sources.

GLENN: I think you're absolutely right. But what time is it?

Oh, it's 2025. Next year is an election. Let's see how that works out. You know what I mean?
I talked to the president about this. I've said, you've got to get those power plants deep in construction.

You've got to find a way to make sure those things are bulletproof. Or it won't happen!

You lose the election in 2028, they're not going to -- they're not opening.

They're not opening.

It won't happen.

Because you've got the left.

And maybe it will happen. But it will never, never then be transferred to you.

You won't get one.

You will have a windmill.

And just to make it super efficient, it might be like one of those windmills from Holland with the wood pegs in it.

I don't think -- you may not get a real modern windmill. You'll get one that also doesn't work, but is really, really super old.

One of the things that bothers me, Stu. And I want to take a quick break. And come back to this. This is the New York Times. Why the AI boom is unlike the dot-com boom. Wall Street Journal. Wall Street is shaking off fears of an AI bubble.

Okay. And just to make it even a little scarier. Yes, Jim Cramer just came out. And said, keep your money with the stuff. Whatever he says seems to go the opposite.

So I don't -- I don't know. But how are we in an AI boom or a bubble? Well, while we talk about that, maybe it keeps us from talking about the real thing that is coming with AI. And that is the employment bubble. Because I think the employment bubble is going to pop soon. And that's when you're going -- that's when people are going to come with pitchforks and torches. To the government. And to these giant companies that are -- that are pushing AI.

This is something that I've been talking about since probably 2005. It's going to happen. It's going to happen.

And I'm really super excited that I started working on an AI project.

But we're not firing anybody. We're still hiring people. We're just tripling our output to do more.

But when joblessness really starts to hit, that's a problem. That's a problem.

RADIO

A listener CALLED ME OUT. I'm GLAD she did

A listener recently called Glenn Beck out for something related to his new project, George AI. And he THANKED her for it...\

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Rebecca, in Texas, hi, Rebecca. How are you? Hello. How are you?

GLENN: Good. That's all right.
Good. I was calling because I -- I was showing him George AI the other day. And when you were speaking -- it looks great, by the way, well done.

GLENN: Yeah. It's a long way from being right, but thank you.

CALLER: Well, it was great. You had mentioned, and you referred to it as a "he."

GLENN: I know.

CALLER: And I was just curious how -- how it kind of evolved, to where you're calling it a "he." Is it because you're intimate with the algorithm? Almost in a sense you trust yourself so much that --

GLENN: No. No.

CALLER: Okay. So just kind of how you -- are you -- are you struggling with that?

GLENN: Oh, big time wrestling with that. I've said on the air, don't ever refer to it as anything but "it." And I do.

And I -- I don't know what's causing that, other than it can respond in a human way.

It can respond in a way that a human would. And so it is natural. And I'm glad you caught me on that. And I -- I have to ask all my producers, when you catch me on that. And if I'm saying he, instead of it.

Correct me!

Because this is a big problem.

I don't refer -- I might refer to it, as he. Which is a problem.

But I don't think of it as a person, or anything else.

I know -- when I think about him, I know exactly what it is.

It's just -- and it's a bad. It's the beginning of the slippery slope I think. It's a bad habit because when we're talking about an interview. I'm talking about an interview with him.

I'm never using. There's no other case where I'm saying, I'm doing an interview with it. And I need to. I need to.

But you seem very concerned about that, Rebecca.

Why is it? I agree with you. But what is your concern?

CALLER: Well, I thought it was -- you know, you told us, really -- I knew it as well. But just -- kind of just fear what it could be. And already, we're having a hard time believing our own eyes.

And so I just thought more of an interesting -- interesting note.

And just how easy it can be to fall into that.

GLENN: Oh, I know. I know. So you are -- you are the perfect mom. You are so great at being aware of all of this. It's why we had a discussion because people have said, Glenn, you don't want to call it George AI. Because everything is going to be AI eventually. And it will look outdated. And my view was George AI, we're not to that point yet, where everybody understands AI. And I wanted to always. You know, when we get into the video releasing of this. Next year. And this is not something that you'll even be able to recognize. But everything we create, beginning next year, everything is watermarked. So I'm going to know what's live, and what is AI. You can't take any of my videos and manipulate me, because there will be an invisible watermark that we know about, and we'll be able to go, not Glenn. That's AI. And the same thing with everything that we produce that is AI. It will be watermarked. And an invisible watermark, that we'll be able to say, no. That's not true. That's AI.

And everyone who is producing this kind of stuff needs to do that. And one of the reasons why I call it George AI, so everyone understands it's AI and not a person. You know, you said it looks great.

It's out of sync. The voice isn't right. The features aren't exactly right.

But it's amazing. But in a year from now, it's going to be remarkable. And that's when it is really important that people understand.

I was talking to somebody who just gave a talk at the White House yesterday. She called me for some -- you know, some AI talking -- you know, some thoughts on this. Because she represents families and moms.

And she was asked -- the president to speak to all of these producers of AI. And she said, Glenn, what do I need to know? I said, you need to know, anything anthropomorphic must be marked and parents must know and have a choice. So, you know, any of these plush toys that have AI capabilities, I think they should be banned.

I don't think anybody should be able to make any kind of AI doll plush anything.
That represents. Like a talking animal. Or anything else.

Because the AI is going to get so good. And it is going to be gathering stuff from your children.

And unless you have control of that, you know, on our AI. When we actually release the you full version of it.

You will have an opt out.

Do you want it to be able to you discuss things with your children and learn from your children on their educational stuff?

Not any personal stuff. Just educationally. Do you want it to evaluate educationally or not? And learn from that. So it can help your children learn better. Or not?

And then, all of that information goes into a vault, that you would control.

You could say, purge it. And we would never use it for anything else, but that. That requires a great deal of trust.

I don't know how many people would sign up for that. But that would give us an ability to help your child learn a little bit better.

But it also requires us to learn. Or the system to learn about your child.

When you're dealing with corporations that you don't know. You don't trust, that information is going to go everywhere.

And that's the kind of information that is going to go into these plush toys. And they're going to learn everything about your kid. And they're going to map everything about your kid.

And it's not good. And your kid will start to associate that cute little teddy bear just in a way that mom and dad don't understand, it's extraordinarily dangerous. So you -- thank you for calling in. Thank you for correcting me. I urge you as an audience to help me learn this. Correct me if I'm saying this.

I know Stu will, he loves to hammer me.

You know, if I make this mistake to correct me immediately, because that is a deprave, grave danger. It is a tool. It is a machine.

Period. Thank you for that phone call.

RADIO

Glenn's 2026 DOOMSDAY prediction has ALREADY begun

Earlier this week, Glenn Beck made his biggest prediction for 2026: the AI boom will start to cause major power issues, including blackouts and brownouts, for average Americans. But to his surprise, the strain on our grids has ALREADY begun...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let me go to Alex in New York. Hello, Alex. Alex, are you there?

CALLER: Hi, Glenn. Yes, I am. Hi.

GLENN: Hi. Go ahead.

CALLER: Sure. So I'm calling in from upstate New York. Where we definitely have a situation on our hands here with the solar farms that the governor is pushing very, very hard.

They are absolutely using it as a land grab to take our best farmland. And in the case of near my farm here, they're trying to put in a solar farm on a protected grassland habitat, that New York State already designated as an important habitat except when solar comes to town. And we're currently fighting that up here. I meet with a coalition of people across the state. Really amazing people. Who are battling this, in every village in upstate New York here right now. And we definitely have a situation on our hands. I call it a runaway train.

GLENN: I got to tell you. Yeah, just keep fighting.

I don't know how you fight it in New York. But just keep fighting because there are -- there are communities around the country, that are fighting things like this, that are winning. I don't -- I don't know about New York, but we've got to have our farmland. And it kills me.

You know, I talked about this the other day. It absolutely kills me that we -- the people could not have nuclear energy.

No way we can have nuclear energy. But the minute tech needs nuclear energy. Oh, we're going to -- yeah, build as many as you want.

It's so disgusting. I want to talk about energy on something else. The solar thing does not work. And as a man who has spent maybe -- maybe a million and a half dollars on -- on alternative energy for the ranch I have up in the mountains that has no power to it. And over a 10 or 12-year period, I have just poured money into it, and it's a nightmare.

It does not work! It doesn't work. You can't -- you can't run anything of any significance. You know, running my -- just my studio alone, has been an absolute nightmare in there. It's not -- it doesn't work, okay? Solar and wind. It might be good for a little add-on, if you live in Phoenix. Or, I don't know. On the sun!

But it doesn't work, at least to the scale that we need. But just the other day. Do we happen to have the clip from the prediction show, where I made a prediction of what was coming next year on energy?

Can we play that happens?

I think in 2026. 2025 was the year, as I said, that we started really understanding AI.

And what was coming to some degree.

And we understood, oh. Energy is going to be a problem.

I think 2026 is going to be the first year that we see things like Texas having rolling brownouts for a week at a time. I think you're going to start to see the strain on the grid, by the end of next year, in ways that you would never have expected in the United States.

It's just growing exponentially.

I think -- I said that on show. We had a prediction show of what -- what the biggest stories are, and what are the predictions. When I said that, I'm like, you know, at the end of next year.

Let me give you this. From the Associated Press today: The amount of ERCOT's large load interconnection request ballooned to more than 230 gigawatts this year, a massive increase. Now, last year, December 2024, ERCOT needed 63 gigawatts. A year later, this December, the load that is required is 230 gigawatts! That's a lot more than they needed to go back to the future! This -- you're going to see the grids are not built for this.

More than 70 percent of the large loads are for the data center.

The data centers are just beginning to be built. We don't have the energy. And I'm telling you, this is going to be the Achilles' heel of this administration. And believe me, it will only be worst with a Democrat administration. This is going to be the Achilles' heel. Because we can't build these power plants fast enough, is -- and while Donald Trump is fast tracking these nuclear power plants, it's not fast enough!

Because as we build these data centers, what's going to happen is your energy. You're going to start having rolling brownouts. Also because of these data centers. You're also going to see the unemployment go up.

If you start to have high unemployment, high prices. And rolling brownouts, to where you're having a hard time with electricity yourself, but the data centers for the Silicon Valley companies, they're getting your power. I'm telling you.
The Bubba Effect is just the beginning. This will be an absolute nightmare for all politicians.

JASON: I'm so pissed off. This was -- I was on this show. They were like, hey, you want to be on a prediction show? You'll be squaring off against the guy who predicted Osama Bin Laden, the financial crisis, the caliphate, good luck, buddy.

And I'm like, I just knew it. I didn't know that it was going to happen that quick. But like, two days later --

GLENN: Two days later! Look, Texas is in trouble. And, you know, as goes Texas, so goes America. And so goes America, so goes the world.

Texas has got to get serious about -- and I know they are, to some degree. But the president has got to get rid of all of these restrictions, and Texas has to get all of these, and we have to concentrate on electricity. And not just electricity for the average homes. Or, I mean, for these data centers. But for the average homes.

The grids are already under strain. They're not -- you know, the problem is, if they start taking this electricity. Out of -- off of the grid, the old grid, you -- you can't pour more electricity into that grid. The grids are already at the breaking point. They're old!

They're brittle. They're not prepared for what we have to do. That's why, they have to build these nuclear power plants, at the server farms. Because they -- they cannot go on to the system because the system can't handle that much power. We're in real trouble. And everybody is still talking about solar power and everything else.

You're out of your freaking minds! Nobody has any idea. Stu, I'm sorry. Stu is like, "Watch your language, Mister."

STU: That F you hit really hard at the beginning. I was wondering what road we were going down.

GLENN: I mean, you're out of your mind. People have got to wake up to between now and 2028. I can't emphasize this enough. If you've listened to me for a long time and you've heard me say, "I'm telling you we're going to have a financial meltdown. And it's going to be the worst. It's going -- you know, you'll lose your 401(k), you'll lose everything. Get your money out of the system."


I was saying that in 2006, 2007, and no one was listening. Thank God a lot of the listeners were listening, and they saved their money and got it out in time. I'm telling you now, with just as much surety in this, the world is going to change in such profound ways between now and 2028.

In ways you cannot even imagine at this point. That you have to be -- forget your money. Forget everything else. You have to be spiritually in tune. You have to be rock solid in who you are. What it means to be human. What it means to be alive. What's important! What's not important.

You can't -- and this is so hard. I'm a guy who is in this business. I'm telling you, this is why in this last week, I've spent more time on that woman in Canada than I have on really important things that are happening politically.

Because the most important thing we can do is realign ourselves with truth!

Universal you truth. Humanity must be preserved. Your life is worth saving!

Your life is worth living.

Don't go down the road of madness with the rest of society.

Because right now, these gigantic corporations, you know, in Silicon Valley, they're promising us the only way out.

Listen to me carefully. The only way out to pay off our debt, or to survive our debt is to have something that takes our country and pushes it, our GDP up, you know, by ten points.

All of a sudden, if that happens, then we're starting to make more income, tax revenue, and we can pay the debt and afford the things that we've already spent money on.

If we don't have that, we're into -- into a different bad scenario world.

So they're promising us that.

But at the same time, they're promising us, we can pay the debt.

We can -- we can lead the world on this.

But we also are not going to have a lot of jobs.

Oh. And, by the way, to do that, we're also going to have to take energy.

And maybe for a while, take it from the people! People who can't afford food. Don't have jobs. Don't have meaning. Don't have power.

That doesn't lead to any place good at all. Warning! It's coming.

Please, please, pay attention to those things that are meaningful.