Glenn gets the blogs buzzing




Worst-Case Scenario No. 3


Glenn Beck on Fox News, Feb 20, 2009.

GLENN: I tell you this because of what happened on Friday's television show. Something that quite frankly if you saw it, I hope you saw the shock on my face. I had Michael Scheuer, and Michael Scheuer was the head of the CIA Bin Laden unit. He was the guy during the Clinton administration who was saying, "Please let's go get Bin Laden, please let's go get him. Really we've got to do something." They didn't. He was the guy who was coordinating getting him in the caves after 9/11. He stayed on with George W. Bush because he said neither side is serious about this. The Republicans and the Democrats. Neither will do the right thing. He told me at one point about the chatter that he heard. I mean, he was there. The cave was there. Bin Laden was in the cave, escaped because the White House wouldn't move fast enough. And that was pretty much the straw that broke the camel's back for Michael Scheuer, guy who I quite honestly hated the first time I spoke to him because I was still in bed with George W. Bush. I was still thinking, "No, no, come on." And I hated him the first time, but I listened to him because I'm the kind of guy that I listen to both sides and I listen to extremes to be able to find out what the truth is, and it's usually some place in the middle. This guy is, he's credible. I had him on. Tim Strong was also on. He was with special forces. He was one of the first guys into Iraq this time around. You know, he's a guy who knows. He is also a guy who has been watching what's called the Bubba effect and that is something happens down at the border, somebody's protecting their land, somebody gets killed or there's drugs or whatever and something happens and normally most people would say, okay, you've got to go get that guy because he killed somebody, or whatever. And the police come in, the FBI or ATF come in and because there's such dissatisfaction and such distrust of our government that the people who normally would stand with the FBI or whatever turn on the FBI and say, "You know what, I don't agree with what he did, but you're part of the problem. So you've got to come through me to get him." And then all hell breaks loose. Well, we've been talking to you about this now for two years. It is something that I sensed in my gut when I went down to Texas over two years ago and I said, "Warning, America," and that's when I really started ringing the bell and I told every senator, every congressman I heard. Every time I would get in touch with them, every time I would speak to them, "Please, you must not injure the American people because something's coming. Something is brewing." Well, now it's brewing overseas and you're already starting to see the riots overseas. The reason why I bring this up is because I got in this morning and Stu said to me, "Glenn, did you see all of the blogs about you left and right from Friday's broadcast." What I said on Friday's broadcast when they told me, when Michael Sauer was on and he said -- you know, I said explain the Bubba effect. And he said people are going to take, you know, into their own hands. And I said, okay, what do we do to stop this. And he said, quite frankly, Mr. Beck, you don't. And I said, excuse me? And he said, "You don't. There are people that feel that, you know, this government has betrayed the American people and you don't. You let that play out." And I said -- I hope I did at least, I know I was thinking it -- "That's crazy. You can't do this." So we're going to pursue that line of thinking on the television show. And Stu said that blogs came after me hard left and right for what we did on Friday. What did they say, Stu?

STU: Well, I mean, you kind of would expect, I suppose, the left wing, you know, attacks which were generally, I would furious and --

GLENN: Well, are they -- you know, I don't read any of this stuff. So I don't know. Were they just coming after me because they were saying, "Oh, well, he's just coming after Obama," et cetera, et cetera? Is that kind of the --

STU: I would say yes. Most of them seemed to think that you just started talking about disenfranchisement in the last four weeks.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Which is interesting because all the research you'd need to look at our, I don't know, free e-mail newsletter for the last two years, I mean, it's a lot of research.

GLENN: I know.

STU: But I mean, anyone who would bother doing any research has known you were talking about that for a long time.

GLENN: Yeah. And I want to make this really extraordinarily clear. I've got a couple of things to say on this, but let me give you this one first and that is this is not a Republican/Democrat thing. It may be, it may have been even worse if John McCain were elected. I don't know. But it is not about Obama, it is not about Bush. It is about both sides. First of all, it was on the left feeling disenfranchised in 2000 with Al Gore and the way that was played. And then the right started playing that as well, and they just started attacking each other and so people just got polarized into their positions and couldn't see logic anymore and then George Bush and the Republicans betrayed the American people that voted and fought for them because they got into this big government, they didn't protect the border, they weren't making common sense as conservatives saw it, and I believe that the Democrats, when they are honest with themselves, when it finally dawns on them, are going to feel the same way about their party as the Republicans feel about theirs right now and that is they don't really stand for anything. So this is not a right/left Republican/Democrat. This is a power/money/corruption thing.

STU: Right. And I think actually if it's more -- it's a better fit actually with the McCain thing because what it started was that your side letting you down and so you feel like even when you win, I have no power. That's really the disenfranchisement you've been talking about. It's like even when the guy I elected gets in office.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: The things we were told was going to happen are still not happening.

GLENN: Yeah, they are taking us to the same destination. It doesn't matter who wins. One's taking us quicker there than the other. I would not give George Bush the power of the PATRIOT Act today, and I would have given it really to Bill Clinton had he asked for it. You've got to remember you most likely don't know because you may not have listened to me for very long, but I'm a guy who fought for Bill Clinton going in and shooting Osama Bin Laden, you know. And as crazy -- you have to -- remember, my job is to bring you messages. My job is to bring you the news as I see it, not anything other than my analysis of the news. That's my job. Okay, I did that in 1999, and the right reared up and, "How dare you. You're just trying to..." when I said there will be bodies and buildings and blood in the streets of New York if you don't get Osama Bin Laden. You've got to listen to this guy and take him at his word. He's bluffing. And the right came after me because the right thought I was trying to defend Bill Clinton. We have got to stop talking about politics and look at the hard truth. Had we gone in in 1999 or 1998 and gotten Osama Bin Laden, the world may have been completely different. We may not have had -- we may have, but we may not have had 9/11.

Now, we can either make this about politics, we can make this about the messenger or we can listen to the message and say, "We don't want this to happen." And anybody who is in the sound of my voice, if you think that I am for you and a civil uprising, you're out of your mind. And let me explain why. If you think you're going to be Thomas Jefferson and the blood of patriots will have to be spilled so it will replenish the tree of liberty, if you think that this is 1776, you're sadly mistaken. This is the French Revolution that would be coming our way, not the American Revolution, and there's a huge difference. One of them ended really badly. One of them ended with a guillotine, one of them ended with really bad people taking charge. It didn't work and here's why. Because in France they had disconnected from God. They didn't -- they were not rooted in God and honor. It was a totally different thing. Benjamin Franklin said, "I don't think we can do this revolution. I don't think we can have it," until he started listening to the people and realizing that the people were honorable, that they were God-centered, that they were not in it for blood, they were not in it for power, they were not in it for their own agenda. They were doing it because they felt that it was the right thing to do, it was right for the freedom of man. You've got another thing coming, jack, if you think the majority is ready for a revolution and is even mentally prepared spiritually to be able to pick sides and know which is right. There are crazy people that are in the Aryan Nation, that are in the 9/11 truthers, that are in -- that are just pure anarchists, there are Marxists, there are foreign countries that would like this land. You are crazy to do anything to destabilize this country, crazy. We must work within the framework. We must be people to get together and sit down and talk. We must vote people out and only vote people in that have some shred of honor and common decency. The world is a very dangerous place and if anybody thinks that I am calling for or wishing for or hoping for, you're out of your mind. I understand what this means. I understand no one wants to hear it. I understand that it puts my job, my life, everything in jeopardy. I get it. But it's not going to stop me from telling you the truth, and the truth is we are headed for rage. And the truth is if anybody acts on that rage, we are in deeper trouble than even I think we're in.

Glenn created "The Senate Fails to Condemn INFANTICIDE" in response to the Senate not passing Nebraska Senator Ben Sasses' bill banning infanticide early this year. In an effort to help support pro-life charities, Glenn first posted this for sale on eBay before being banned multiple times before we finally had enough and put it up for sale on bidpal.net.

At the time of this post, the bid was up to $4,700 — but we can do better than that. Please help us raise money for a good cause, you don't even have to display it anywhere in your home, you can just keep it in storage or something! If you want this priceless piece created by one of the most influential people in the world of art, place your bids here.

Can you remember the economic crisis of 2008 and how you felt when the news broke that Lehman Brothers had collapsed? I have found an economic threat that everyone needs to be aware of, so you can prepare yourself in case we see another 2008 type collapse. I am going to present the evidence to you and I urge you to verify everything and to form your own opinion.

What is that threat?

It is a bank called Deutsche Bank. They are by far the most dominant bank in Germany which is the world's fourth-largest economy. In 2018 they had €2.08 Trillion worth of assets and the second-placed bank (DZ Bank) had €506 Billion worth of assets. To show you how dominant this bank is, they have more assets than the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th sized banks combined.
When we review a business there are three key parts to analysis:

  • Market sentiment
  • Business numbers
  • Technical Analysis

Market Sentiment

Deutsche Bank has a long history of potential scandals including going all the way back to World War 2 and dealing in Nazi gold. Below are five recent stories which have increased the negative sentiment around Deutsche Bank.

  1. In 2007, they purchased a portfolio of loans worth $7.8 billion and purchased insurance from Warren Buffets Company. It was discovered they did not set aside enough capital to cover any potential losses. Over the course of the ten years, they lost $1.6 billion, and when they sold the loan they did not update their financial statements to include the big loss
  2. The Panama Papers are an ongoing investigation looking for many things including offshore tax havens. These investigations have resulted in several heads of state resigning including in Iceland and Pakistan. Last November, 170 police raided 6 different offices in Frankfurt looking for evidence of money laundering.
  3. Estonia is a small country in Eastern Europe. It has a population of 1.3 million people and a GDP of €26 billion. In January, it was discovered Deutsche Bank got involved with a Danish bank called Danke Bank and processed over $230 billion worth of cross country payments (including from Soviet Russia) through one bank in Estonia.
  4. There have been rumors of issues with Deutsche for a while now and one of the solutions put forth was a merger with a bank called CommerzBank. The leaders of both companies met and they even got support from politicians. In April, news broke that the merger talks had failed because over worries the risks and costs would be too great.
  5. Last week in France, Investment banking boss Garth Ritchie and others were arrested in France over illicit tax transactions.

Business Numbers

Deutsche Bank is already struggling as they are losing staff, losing market share, and bonuses are expected to be down at least 10% and further rounds of cost-cutting to come. Now imagine the impact if business costs start going up.

The banking industry works in a very simple way. They raise funds through large bonds at low-interest rates and then sell those funds to business and individuals thru products like loans and credit cards at a higher interest rate which results in a potential profit.

Earlier this year, Deutsche Bank tried raising money through several bonds. They paid 180bp (basis points) on a two-year bond and 230bp on a seven-year bond. Let me put this in context for you. There is a small bank in Spain called Caixabank which paid 225bp on a five-year bond and one of the larger banks in Spain, BBVA paid 130bp on a five-year bond.

  • How and why is a small bank in Spain getting a better deal on bonds than a huge bank in Germany?
  • Why is a large bank in Spain getting a bond 100bp cheaper than a German bank?
  • What does the market know that we do not?

Stock Price

Deutsche is also missing revenue projections which further hurt the business ability to survive and prosper. As you can imagine all of this news has a deep and lasting impact on its stock price which is in deep trouble. Before I share the stock price, I need to put this into the context of the market and the industry compared to the big economic crash of 2008. Below you will see a chart of some banking stocks from around the world with their peak price prior to the 2008 crash, the low of the 2008 recession and the price today:

As you can see from the above chart the banks in America have recovered from the 2008 recession by anywhere up 375% and JP Morgan has not only recovered its price in full but is constantly setting new high's. Ireland went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by the EU/IMF following the 2008 crash and even our national bank has more than doubled its price since 2008. The worst performing bank I could find was Societe Generale which has issues but is still hovering around its 2008 low price levels.

Now let's put that into the context of Deutsche Bank. Not only has the stock not rebounded but it is over 65% below its 2008 low at $6.75.

Technical Analysis

When you are dealing with the stock market, you also have people who study pricing through technical analysis. Experts look at things like FIB sequences, trend lines, and support levels. Support levels are a key metric for a stock failing because are looking to find where it will find support and potentially bounce higher.

We are very close to a key support level ($6.40) and if the price goes below this level, there is no saying exactly how low the price could go. At least one company expects Deutsche to fall below this support level, as several weeks ago UBS downgraded the stock to a sell order. This news was compounded last Friday when rating agency Fitch, downgraded their credit rating to BBB or two levels above JUNK status.

Other Information

I know you are likely reading this and thinking "this bank must have smart people in charge and surely they have a plan, right?" I am sure there is a plan and while they have kept their cards close to their chest, they have spoken in the past about the areas they foresee having growth for the company – they include business in Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Egypt. Do they strike you as countries which are stable and will offer steady and reliable growth? Do you have to think really hard to imagine how this could go potentially very wrong?

Questions

I believe there is at least a solid case Deutsche is in a LOT of trouble. So what are possible scenarios for the future? I will lay out the key questions below but I must stress that it's impossible to say for sure what exactly will happen. One of the key numbers to remember here is they have roughly €50 billion worth of derivatives.

  • How likely is it that the bank can turn things around and survive?
  • How likely is it the bank continues to run into trouble, its stock price fails and eventually fails?
  • If you think it is likely it will fail, the question becomes what will the fallout be? Who will be affected?
  • Will they be bailed out?
  • If so, by whom? The German government, ECB, IMF, the Federal Reserve?
  • What will the German government think? Some members recently spoke out saying they would block public money for the proposed merger? Will they block funds if it failed?
  • Will other banks be exposed and affected? Will they have to take losses?
  • Will those losses be spread around or will one or more bank be mainly affect?
  • Will this affect the sentiment of the banking sector and cause a panic?
  • If there are issues and it starts affecting the stock prices, what will be the impact on other industries?

Last Question

The last question revolves solely around the banks and the regulators? How secure are the other banks? We all hear about how banks are now put through "stress tests" but how much trust do you put in those results? How much trust do you have in the regulators?

I know this may make me sound like a conspiracy theorist to some but it's an honest question. The Fed is on public record saying they want to keep this economy strong as long as possible. If a bank did not perform strongly in a stress test or even barely failed one, do you think they would report it?

Can you imagine the pressure that body would come under to stay silent? Can you imagine the rhetoric they would face with questions like, "Are you really going to fail one bank? Do you know how many people will lose their jobs if you do that?" Am I saying this is happening? No, but can you really rule it out 100% as a possibility?

I urge you to ponder on these questions, do your own research and find YOUR answers.

Update: The most freaquently asked question I have received from this column / show is how much time do we have to prepare. This is an impossible question to answer, as it could fail tomorrow, next week or might be next year. However I want to provide you a potential date for your diary – July 24th. That is when Deutsche will release their next earnings report and if it comes in below expectations, it could cause a further drop in price casting more doubt over the future viability of the bank.

Please support Jonathon's weekly podcast which is exclusive to the Blaze Media and available for FREE. He offers a unique perspective by promoting America's Founding Principles and brings every issue back to a set of core principles which are always based around the laws of nature. You can find links to his show by clicking here or by searching for Freedoms Disciple on your favorite audio platform.

Survey: Where do you stand on these conspiracy theories?

Thought Catalog / Unsplash

Have you seen this survey on the most-believed conspiracy theories in America?

It's no surprise the survey has been getting so much attention. The results are actually a pretty disturbing.

Infographic: Belief in Conspiracy Theories in the United States | Statista

I decided to put together a quick survey of my own, with slightly different wording.

Up-vote the ones you agree with and down-vote the ones you disagree with.

I believe Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK alone. However, I would not be surprised to find out the government sealed evidence that others were involved.

If by "deep state" you mean long-time Washington power brokers who are used to calling the shots and now feel threatened by Donald Trump not listening to their advice or council — yes, I do believe that many people like that are working against him and his administration.

Whether alien bodies are in Area 51 or not, I do believe the government knows more about UFOs than they have told us.

I do not believe the U.S. government was involved in 9/11, but as we know, NSA advisor Sandy Berger was caught destroying documents from the national archives related to both Bush and Clinton. All U.S. administrations have been to close to the Saudis, and the Saudis were involved in 9/11 at some level.

I believe the climate is always changing — it's natural. I would be willing to accept that man MAY play a role in this. But I do not believe in the solutions currently being discussed, nor do I believe the intention of most political activists are pure.

Any talk of the Illuminati provides the true dangers to man's freedom — like very powerful NGOS and men like George Soros — a perfect cover.

The U.S. government has done some horrible experiments on people and land — I also suspect they will do more things in the future. But I do not believe in the systematic spraying of chemicals using chemtrails.

The moon landing was real, but I see a time coming when people will not be able to trust their eyes due to deep fakes.

What do you think?

Let me know in the comments section below.