Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcast
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2023 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Glenn Beck: Michelle Obama Dangles the Bait

April 06, 2010
Radio Clips

The Glenn Beck Program




Watch Glenn Beck weekdays at 5p & 2a ET on Fox News Channel

 Let me get right to some audio and video that is being spread around the Internet that I believe needs to be commented on.  Here is Michelle Obama.  Do we know where she was speaking? 

PAT:  I don't. 

 

GLENN:  Can you find out for me by the end of the monologue because this is important on the point that I want to make on this. Listen carefully to Michelle Obama recently about Barack Obama. 

 

MICHELLE OBAMA:  Surrounding HIV testing which is still plaguing so many of our communities, which you all know a lot of that is due to homophobia.  Barack has led by example.  When we took our trip to Africa and visited his home country in Kenya, we took a public HIV test. 

 

GLENN:  Okay.  Stop, stop.  First of all, let me just say this because I think everybody wants us to concentrate on the second part, and let me just say this.  Play the first part again, please. 

 

MICHELLE OBAMA:  Surrounding HIV testing which is still plaguing so many of our communities which you all know a lot of that is due to homophobia. 

 

GLENN:  Stop. 

 

PAT:  What? 

 

GLENN:  I don't, I don't know a single person that looks at HIV testing, Sarah, do you?  Are you shaking your head?  Okay, because you're laughing and I thought maybe you did.  I don't know a single person that looks at HIV testing as anything other than promiscuous sex at this point.  Homophobia? 

 

STU:  So the case would be that I would go get an AIDS test but I'm afraid of gay people? 

 

GLENN:  I guess. 

 

STU:  I don't ‑‑ 

 

GLENN:  It is such a skewed, ridiculous point of view that, I mean, just needed to be addressed.  Because that can't stand. Now, I just have to say one more thing.  If somebody has HIV, if I was living in 1981, they have HIV, are they gay?  Rock Hudson, wasn't that his name, Rock Hudson?  Remember when he got HIV and we were like, he's gay?  Somebody says, he has HIV.  I don't ‑‑ I think, oh, jeez, who was he having sex with?  And I don't mean male/female, male/male, female ‑‑ I don't mean that.  I mean, you think of the person having promiscuous sex. 

 

STU:  Unprotected sex, that's the point. 

 

GLENN:  What you think of. 

 

STU:  Or sharing needles. 

 

GLENN:  Yeah.  Can we please once in a while just recognize how far our society has come, please, just once?

 

Okay.  Now, what else did she say in that magic treasure trove of sentences?  Play it again, Sam. 

 

MICHELLE OBAMA:  Surrounding HIV testing which is still plaguing so many of our communities, which you all know a lot of that is due to homophobia.  Barack has led by example.  When we took our trip to Africa and visited his home country in Kenya, we took a public HIV test. 

 

GLENN:  Stop.  Stop. 

 

PAT:  So obvious. 

 

GLENN:  When we ‑‑ and we visited his home country in Kenya.  Okay.  Really?  Really?  Are we this stupid?  Really?  "Oh, my goodness, she just verified!"  Did she now?  May I ask this question:  What is it that they're trying to do right now?  What is it they are trying to do?  Every bit of their action is poke, poke, poke, make them extremists, poke them some more.  Every bit of it! Uh‑huh.  Mmm‑hmmm. 

 

Let's see.  Nancy Pelosi gets on along with everybody in congress and says these people, these tea partiers, they're radicals, they're out of control, they're violent, they're dangerous.  I can't take it!  I saw this in the Seventies.  I'm very afraid of them!  I'm very afraid of them!  They don't want us to pass healthcare because they hate people so much! 

 

Okay.  They gave that speech and then they go right out and walk through the crowd of dangerous people?  They walk through that crowd to pass what they say... (sobbing).  That doesn't make any sense.  No rational human being does that.  Poke.  Poke. Waiting for you to strike back.  Waiting for something to be done.  Waiting for you to yell a racist epithet, anything.  Waiting. They need you to be what quite honestly many of them were in the 1960s.  Radicals.  Violent.  They don't know you.  They don't know you.  That's not who these people are.  That's not who the tea partiers ‑‑ the tea partiers, generally speaking, hate the hippies.  They may have even been a hippie at one point but they're embarrassed by it now.  It's like the old photos, you look at yourself from 20 years ago and you're like, oh, jeez, was I stupid.

 

So now there's a couple of, there's a couple of options here, I guess.  One, Michelle Obama has just made the biggest gaffe of all time. 

 

PAT:  Uh‑oh!  Uh‑oh! 

 

GLENN:  My gosh! 

 

STU:  She let the cat out of the bag! 

 

GLENN:  It's a treasure trove! 

 

PAT:  Lucy, you got some splainin' to do! 

 

GLENN:  Look at how crazy she is. 

 

PAT:  Whoa! 

 

GLENN:  She just said he's not a citizen!  Oops!  Okay.  I guess that's a possibility.  I don't think there's a very good chance of that unless, A, was she drunk?  She doesn't appear to be; B, heavily sedated, doesn't appear to be; three, incredibly suddenly stupid beyond belief.  I don't think so.  Barring those or a sudden brain aneurysm. 

 

PAT:  Stroke of some kind. 

 

GLENN:  Maybe, could have. 

 

PAT:  Didn't appear to have one. 

 

GLENN:  Yeah. 

 

PAT:  Didn't appear to have one.

 

GLENN:  Can't imagine that that was what happened there.  Second option:  She's speaking to the Kenyan Society of America for the prevention of AIDS.  I personally can see a spouse or a candidate going to, let's just say I'm speaking to the Italian American community.  The Italian American house of spaghetti and AIDS prevention.  And I could say, you know the whole AIDS thing, boy, we've really got to get tested.  In fact, when Tania and I went on a trip, she did a responsible thing.  She got an AIDS test when we went to her home country of Italy.  Now, she was born in the United States, but she's, what, second generation Italian, or second generation American.  So is it her home country?  No.  Could I be playing to the audience, you know, hey. 

 

STU:  Right. 

 

GLENN:  "And I'm German, too."  No, you're not.  You're American but, hey, we love you for that.  Thanks for throwing us that bone. 

 

STU:  Yeah.  And how many times has he said, you know, my dad, he's Italian. 

 

GLENN:  Yeah. 

 

STU:  People do talk that way. 

 

GLENN:  You do do that. 

 

STU:  It's possible. 

 

GLENN:  Now, that has some likelihood of happening.  Do we know where she was speaking yet? 

 

PAT:  I don't. 

 

GLENN:  Okay. 

 

PAT:  I can't find it. 

 

GLENN:  If she was at the Kenyan ‑‑ 

 

PAT:  She wasn't, I don't think. 

 

GLENN:  You don't know.  Let's leave that possibility out there. 

 

PAT:  All right, okay. 

 

GLENN:  She may have been speaking at the Kenyan Society Against AIDS.  And that makes that a possibility.  What reduces that possibility is her husband is so tortured by these people.  You don't know what it's like to live with the people contributory negligence my husband's, even his birth certificate.  They won't leave us alone!  "And they are so frightening.  I saw stuff like this back in the Seventies and I'm so afraid!"  If your spouse were tortured, tortured by people that were claiming that my wife was an Italian, was born in Italy and they were just relentless on it, if I said, "And my wife and the home country of Italy," I would have immediately had a look of dread on my face like, oh, crap, I didn't mean it that way.  And I might have even said, "I didn't mean it that way," but I could see somebody just going on, "But they have to have the look of dread like, oh action dear God, what have I just done to my husband."  Because I know I would have gotten home and my wife would have said, I'm being tortured by these people and what do you say!"  And she would have been right.  But the spouse being stupid?  Not incredibly profoundly stupid like Option Number 1 but just a spouse being stupid and saying something wrong is a possibility.  But I don't think that's the answer.  So let me tell you the third option, what I think it is.  We'll do that ‑‑ hang on just a second.  No, go ahead, Stu.  No, no, go ahead and interrupt the show at any time. 

 

STU:  You were just going to go to a commercial and now you are blaming it on me and that is the sort of blame shifting that occurs on this program. 

 

PAT:  Yeah, it was good. 

 

STU:  I have some additional details on the speech. 

 

PAT:  Okay. 

 

STU:  Would you like to hear them? 

 

GLENN:  Was it the Kenyan Society for the Prevention of AIDS? 

 

STU:  No, but in a way it does explain the first comment that you were very frustrated about. 

 

GLENN:  Okay. 

 

STU:  She was at the, let's see, the Gay and Lesbian Leadership Council.  So the homophobia remark may have been explained. 

 

GLENN:  Okay, that was throwing a bone to the audience. 

 

STU:  Potentially.  But the other thing that's significant, it is a June 2008 speech, June 2008. 

 

PAT:  Oh, it was that long ago? 

 

STU:  Yeah, apparently just going viral. 

 

PAT:  June 2008? 

 

GLENN:  How did that happen? 

 

PAT:  Uh‑oh, Lucy, you got some splainin' to do! 

 

GLENN:  I'm telling you. 

 

PAT:  That does ‑‑ I will say this. 

 

GLENN:  I'm telling you. 

 

PAT:  That adds validity to ‑‑ 

 

STU:  Option Number 2. 

 

GLENN:  Wait, wait.  Does it?  Does it?  Does it?  Who released this tape?  Who's been sitting on this tape?  Who's been sitting on this tape? 

 

PAT:  True. 

 

GLENN:  Who had their videotape recorder going at the gay and lesbian advisory council?  Who ‑‑ were you there, Pat?  Did you tape this and then decide to ‑‑ 

 

PAT:  No, uh‑uh. 

 

GLENN:  Where did this tape come from at this time?  Huh.  I think it actually adds credibility to theory Number 3, which we will give to you here in just a second.

 

<<BREAK>>

 

GLENN:  We're back with Michelle Obama and new video that is going around now from Michelle Obama where she talks about Barack Obama and his home country of Kenya.  I gave you the first two options.  The first two options is, oh, my gosh, she's just verified he's not an American citizen!  Oh!  Uh‑huh.  Option Number 2, she is just saying something stupid as a spouse.  She's just saying something, you know, political.  You know, remember if this came out in 2008, they are trying to ‑‑ he's a man of the world, he's lived all over the world, he's his home country of Kenya, which, his dad is from Kenya.  His dad left him to go join the communist government of Kenya.  Hello.  He's from Kenya.  His aunt is about to be deported back to Kenya because she's an illegal alien here.  That's never going to happen, but you get the point.  So it is kind of home country.  Saying something stupid. The third one is, it's really, why is this coming out now?  As we find out, it's 2008 and it was at the, what is it, the gay and lesbian ‑‑ 

 

STU:  Leadership council of the DNC. 

 

GLENN:  Of the DNC.  Who had this videotape and they have been sitting on it for so long?  Why is this being released now? Here's the third theory.  The third theory is this is a losing battle.  This paints people into nut jobs, just as much as Bush blew up the World Trade Center and Dick Cheney went and was SCUBA diving and he blew up the levees in New Orleans.  Now, there are people that believe that the 9/11 job was done by George W. Bush and his henchmen and Dick Cheney only having heart attacks because he was trying to SCUBA dive so much, getting in shape for blowing up the levees.  Those people are nuts.  The idea of the birth certificate?  Let's just say that it's not true.  Let's just say that he's actually born here in America. 

 

STU:  Let's be crazy. 

 

GLENN:  Be out on the edge.  Be out on the edge.  Let's just say he was born here in America and there weren't, you know, KGB government operatives that were planting stories in the press this in Hawaii in 1962. 

 

PAT:  Okay, but this is all silly. 

 

GLENN:  I know. 

 

PAT:  You know. 

 

GLENN:  I know. 

 

PAT:  I mean ‑‑ 

 

GLENN:  I got it. 

 

PAT:  You are asking us to stretch. 

 

GLENN:  I know. 

 

PAT:  Okay. 

 

GLENN:  Let's just say that he's not the Manchurian Candidate from birth. 

 

PAT:  Okay. 

 

GLENN:  Okay?  If you have ‑‑ if you're playing to your base and you are trying to paint people as crazy, as tea partygoers, as hateful, as people you just can't be around and you are trying to rally your base around you, wouldn't one of the best things that you could do is go on the Birther thing?  Let me just give you the poll numbers on it.  With independents, 83‑8.  Was he born in America?  83% of independents say yes.  8% say no.  Among adults between 45 and 59, 82 to 8.  In the Midwest?  90‑6.  In the midwest, not the Northeast.  In the Midwest ‑‑ think Ohio ‑‑ 90‑6.  They have nothing that polls this well, nothing.  Is he an American?  Yes.  The majority says overwhelmingly yes.  So if you want to make them into moon landing people, what's the most effective sign that you could carry at a tea party?  I mean, if you are thinking like the Obama administration, he was born in Kenya.  It's the most effective sign to paint you into a nut job that you can carry.  Why is this tape being released now?  They need you to be perceived as a nut job! 

— WatchGlenn Beckweekdays at 5p & 2a ET on Fox News Channel

THESE 19 states joined Desantis' alliance against ESG. Here are their 2 main goals.

On Monday, Biden exercised his veto powers for the first time to strike down a bill that would ban states from taking ESG into consideration when investing state pension funds. In his veto message, Biden said:

Retirement plan fiduciaries should be able to consider any factor that maximizes financial returns for retirees across the country. That's not controversial — that's common sense.

At the risk of using the loaded word "gaslit," it continues to be the operative word in describing the policies coming out of the Biden White House. It is painfully obvious that ESG itself inhibits investors from "maximizing financial returns." That was never ESG's goal in the first place. Yet Biden said the opposite.

ESG aims to incentivize investors to make "socially conscious" (a.k.a woke) investments, even if they are at odds with the greatest return on investment. It has enabled state governments and investment firms to use their monopoly over the investment space to force companies to choose between adopting their woke ESG standards and losing critical investment. Isn't there a word for that? Extortion? Or modern-day politics?

ESG enables state governments to force companies to choose between adopting their woke ESG standards and losing critical investment.

That is the sole reason why Republicans brought the bill to his desk in the first place: As Glenn said, "ESG poses a clear and present danger to the American way of life, the soul of our nation and every sector of our economy. ESG was never about ROI. It was always about pushing a leftist agenda.

And Biden knows this.

Why would he want to give up something that enables his political party and corporate elites to control and manipulate the political affiliations of their people? Who would want to give up that power? Biden certainly doesn't.

And he didn't.

Instead, he boldly asserts the exact opposite: that ESG itself "maximizes financial returns," relying on the divided American people to debate the policy into oblivion, while he gets exactly what he wants: the retention of power over the American consumer. Dare I say again that "gaslit" is the operative word here?

If one thing is clear, it is that we cannot rely on the federal government to act in the best interests of the American people. However, in this critical moment, the state governments are stepping up to do what the federal government refuses to: protecting the rights of the American consumer.

In a joint resolution led by Florida Governor Ron Desantis, 19 states have pledged “to protect individuals from the ESG movement" at the state level. This is critical.

We cannot rely on the federal government to act in the best interests of the American people.

Florida leads Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming in signing the historic policy agreement among all 19 states, pledging to ban ESG practices within their jurisdictions.

The anti-ESG alliance calls ESG what it is:

A direct threat to the American economy, individual economic freedom, and our way of life, putting investment decisions in the hands of the woke mob to bypass the ballot box and inject political ideology into investment decisions, corporate governance, and the everyday economy.

This alliance takes aim at two specific practices used by left-leaning states to force companies to adopt ESG-approved practices.

First, the alliance promises to protect "taxpayers from ESG influences across state systems."

While other states are using YOUR taxpayer dollars to fund pro-ESG corporations, these states pledge to BAN this practice to ensure "that only financial factors are considered to maximize the return on investment."

The chief factor behind any investment should be determining whether that investment yields the maximum return on their investment. However, many states are using YOUR taxpayer-funded pension and retirement funds to invest in ESG-approved businesses. This not only forces businesses to consider adopting ESG standards in hopes of obtaining investment. Moreover, states are using YOUR taxpayer dollars to fund them! Would you want your government to invest your hard-earned money for partisan purposes?

The anti-ESG alliance is taking the politics out of investment and putting consumer power back in the hands of the American people. These state governments pledged to make investment decisions based solely on maximizing the return on investment, not in using your taxpayer dollars to fund their political agendas.

Second, the alliance promises to protect "citizens from ESG influences in the financial sector."

ESG standards force businesses to consider the political leanings of their customer base. For example, Discover announced they will begin tracking its customers' gun-related purchases. One of the leaders behind this push is Amalgamated Bank, which boasts on their website that their institution "supports sustainable organizations, progressive causes, and social justice." Amalgamated Bank CEO Priscilla Sims Brown said:

We all have to do our part to stop gun violence and it sometimes starts with illegal purchases of guns and ammunition The new code will allow us to fully comply with our duty to report suspicious activity and illegal gun sales to authorities without blocking or impeding legal gun sales.

This virtue signaling at the cost of your privacy is earning both Discover and Amalgamated ESG brownie points.

There are countless stories of Americans, like YOU, getting locked out of their bank accounts, dropped as clients, tracked and targeted, all because their personal political beliefs don't align with big corporations' ESG goals. Their individual privacy and dignity as a consumer aren't worth the risk of lowering the company's ESG score.

That's why the anti-ESG alliance is pledging to protect the residents in their states from this corrupt ESG exploitation. The alliance promised to ban "so-called social Credit Scores' in banking and lending practices aimed to prevent citizens from obtaining financial services like loans, lines of credit, and bank accounts."

They also promised to stop "financial institutions from discriminating against customers for their religious, political, or social beliefs, such as owning a firearm, securing the border, or increasing our energy independence."

In short, they have targeted the political extortion hidden behind the virtuous ESG veil to protect citizens from being discriminated against based on political affiliation.

It's time to step up.

Biden may have struck down the effort to restore the freedom of the American consumer at the federal level. However, these states are taking it upon themselves to do what they ought: to ban practices that threaten the freedoms and privacy of their citizens.

If your state did not joining the anti-ESG alliance, it's time to demand that they step up and do their job to protect you and the rest of your fellow citizens from corrupt ESG practices. As Glenn said, "The conservative movement is best when it moves in unison." We must act and unison and push our states to protect our economic freedom and our way of life.

Are YOU prepared? Download Glenn's ULTIMATE preparation guide!

How prepared are YOU to weather a future crisis? We recently published a brand new quiz so you can find out exactly how prepared you are. Whether you're a "prepper" with a bunker fit for the apocolypse or just want to feel more secure for the future, there is always something more to learn. That's why Glenn wants to give his newsletter subscribers his "Ultimate Preparation Guide," filled with practical tips for building a solid foundation to weather future crises. And let's face it—in our crazy world right now, who couldn't use a bit more peace of mind?

Enter your email below to get "Glenn's Ultimate Preparation Guide" sent straight to your inbox!

THESE 12 Republican states are smuggling digital currency through THIS sneaky bill

Dem10 | Getty Images

Editor's Note: Arizona House Bill HB2770 has since been shut down! AZ Rep. Rachel Jones tweeted that the AZ Freedom Caucus shut down the bill before it could reach the board. It is encouraging to see states stepping to protect the American people from getting one step closer to a Central Bank Digital Currency. Hopefully, Arizona will be a precedent for the other states!

On today's radio broadcast, Glenn warned about dangerous Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) language being smuggled into routine legislation in REPUBLICAN-led states. This is unacceptable, and as Glenn said, we can't let this legislation pass as it now stands.

The legislation being used to smuggle in this CBDC language is the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), a routine piece of legislation passed on the state level that helps standardize commercial and business transactions. However, a new round of UCCs being deliberated RIGHT NOW amongst a swath of Republican-led states anticipate the use of "electronic money." In a public letter sent to the Republican states currently deliberating this legislation, the Pro-Family Legislative Network said this can only refer to the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) under consideration and testing by the Federal Reserve. Biden's Executive Order 14067 issued in March of 2022 started the push for CBDC, and now these states, knowingly or unknowingly, are laying the legislative groundwork for making CBDC a reality.

There is absolutely no reason why Republican-led states should aid in laying the foundation for CBDC, yet 12 of them are deliberating it RIGHT NOW, with one UCC bill already on one GOP governor's desk! We have to act NOW to stop these UCCs in their tracks and demand our lawmakers amend the bills without the "electronic money" language.

If your state is listed below, contact your representative NOW to put an end to CBDC language.

1. North Dakota

North Dakota House Bill HB1082 passed BOTH chambers and is now sitting on Governor Burgum's desk. Burgun has 3 DAYS to veto this bill once it's placed on his desk—if not, it will pass automatically. If you are a North Dakota resident, it is absolutely CRUCIAL that you contact Governor Burgum's office NOW and demand that he veto this bill and re-introduce it without the "electronic money" language.

2. Arizona

Arizona House Bill HB2770 has been SHUT DOWN! See the above editor's note for more details.

Arizona House Bill HB2770 passed the House majority and minority caucuses. Arizona residents, contact your representative's office NOW so that they amend this bill without the "electronic money" language.

3. Arkansas

Arkansas House Bill HB1588 is in committee, and if passed, will head to the House floor. Though the bill is only in its beginning stages, it's important for Arkansas residents to stop this bill in its tracks and amend it without the "electronic money" language.

4. Missouri

Missouri House Bill HB1165 is also in its beginning stages in committee. That means it's important to contact your representative as soon as possible to amend it without the "electronic money" language.

5. Oklahoma

Oklahoma House Bill HB 2776 passed the House Committee and will go to a chamber vote soon. If passed, it will go to the Senate, then the governor's desk. If you are an Indiana resident, contact your representative's office NOW to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

6. Indiana

Indiana Senate Bill SB0486 passed the Senate and is headed to the House. Republicans control Indiana's executive office and BOTH chambers of the legislature. There is no excuse for this bill to pass. If you are an Indiana resident, it's vital you contact your representative NOW and demand they amend this bill without the "electronic money" language.

7. Kentucky

Kentucky Senate Bill SB64 passed the Senate and is now being deliberated in the House. If you live in Kentucky, contact your representative's office to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

8. Montana

Montana Senate Bill SB370 passed the Senate and was sent to the House on March 3rd. If you are a Montana resident, contact your representative's office NOW so that the bill doesn't without changing the "electronic money" language.

9. Nebraska

Nebraska's Legislative Bill LB94 passed committee and the first floor vote. As Nebraska only has one legislative chamber, this bill is dangerously close to passing the legislature and being sent to the governor's desk. If you are a Nebraska resident, contact your representative's office NOW and demand they amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

10. New Hampshire

New Hampshire House Bill HB584 is currently in House committee deliberations and has not yet reached the House floor. If you are a New Hampshire resident, contact your representative's office NOW to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

11. Tennessee

Tennessee House Bill HB0640 didn't successfully pass the House. However, it was deferred to a Senate committee and has now taken the form of Senate Bill SB0479, which is now in committee. This bill is still alive, and it's important for you, Tennessee residents, to stop it before it reaches the floor! Contact your representative to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

12. Texas

Texas House Bill HB5011 was filed and is ready to be taken up by committee. Fellow Texans, let's not let this bill progress any further! Contact your representative and demand they amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

6 things you NEED to know about the Silicon Valley Bank collapse

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Silicon Valley Bank's collapse is sparking traumatic memories of the 2008 financial crash. Should we be worried SVB is signaling a similar economic catastrophe, or is everyone overreacting to the media's hype? Glenn told his listeners to be "healthily terrified." This event is sure to have ripple effects throughout the economy, but the more you are informed about it, the more you can prepare. Here are 6 things you need to know about Silicon Valley Bank's crash—explained in simple words.

1. The short answer to what happened: SVB didn't have enough money to pay its depositors.

Remember the scene from It's a Wonderful Life when all of the residents make a run on George Bailey's bank demanding their money? Fortunately for them, their money was in the altruistic hands of George Bailey, who used his honeymoon savings to give the depositors the money they demanded.

Silicon Valley Bank's depositors weren't so lucky.

In short, the depositors made a run on Silicon Valley Bank, demanding the withdrawal of their money. But SVB simply didn't have the liquid money available to give their depositors, causing regulators to shut down the bank shortly afterward.

2. It all started with COVID...

Why didn't SVB have enough money for its depositors? To explain this, we have to go back to the pandemic era.

The pandemic saw a rapid decrease in spending and a massive increase in bank deposits. Due to the uncertainty of the future and lockdowns limiting ways to spend money on recreational activities, like restaurants, bars, and other outlets, many Americans stocked up money in their accounts. In fact, SVB's deposits doubled in 2021 alone, bringing in more money than they could lend out to their clients.

To make a return on their available cash, SVB wanted to invest it, as many banks do. Since they had reached their lending limit, they decided to invest it in U.S. Treasury Securities, which are the government's means of funding itself without using taxation (in a nutshell). These are considered "ultra-safe" investments because they are backed by the "full faith and credit of the federal government."

Unlike other forms of investments, investing in Treasuries means the government will do everything within its legal power to pay back the money used to fund itself. In other words, it is typically very safe... so what happened?

3. Then came the magic cocktail—record-high inflation and rising interest rates...

Interest rates ruined the typically "ultra-safe" investment. Due to 40-year record-high inflation, the Fed lifted rates eight times by a total of 4.25 percentage points in 2022, raising interest rates from 0.25 percent to 4.375 percent. This means the value of U.S. Treasuries investments plummeted rapidly. SVB reported that it lost $1.8 billion due to the decreased value of its Treasuries investments after a year of rising interest rates.

This raises the following question: why didn't SVB just weather the storm and wait for interest rates to decrease? There are two issues with this. The first is that, with so many of their assets held up in Treasuries investments, SVB still wouldn't have enough liquid assets to give their depositors during the bank run.

The second issue is that Treasuries investments have a ten-year limit. In 2021 during the Trump administration, interest rates were at an all-time low of 0.125 percent.

The record-fast increase of interest rates in 2022 caused very little chance for rates to go back down to their historic 2021 lows within ten years for banks to make their money back on their investments.

To avoid this, SVB planned to sell their investments at a loss and re-purchase Treasuries investments at the decreased value, giving them an extra ten years to bet on decreased interest rates in the future.

But people caught on to SVB's plan and didn't want to ride with the risk.

4. Account holders withdrew their money... FAST.

As aforementioned, SVP lost $1.8 billion when it sold its depleted Treasuries investments. While they were betting on being able to re-purchase the devalued securities, hoping that they would go up in value in the future with lowered interest rates, investors were worried about the risk.

Once they made the announcement of their $1.8 billion loss, their stocks began to drop, and venture capitalists warned the companies they invest in to pull out of SVB. This had a snowball effect, leading to a "bank run" of depositors demanding to withdraw their money from their SVB accounts.

This led to the perfect storm: SVB's investment losses coupled with the influx of withdrawals were so immense that regulators had to step in and shut the bank down to protect depositors. The government currently "running" SVB, for all practical purposes, is the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The FDIC closed SVB on Friday and reopened the bank on Monday, March 13th as the Deposit Insurance Bank of Santa Clara.

5. Some people may lose their money. 

Banks insure accounts with $250,000 or less with FDIC insurance. That means, in cases of bank failure, exactly like this one, the FDIC covers all accounts less than $250,000. The FDIC said SVB customers who had less than $250,000 in their accounts will have access to all of their money when the bank reopens. Since it reopened this week, they should have access to their funds.

However, many of SVB's depositors had more than $250,000 in their accounts—it is Silicon Valley after all. Therefore, their accounts were not covered by FDIC insurance. Will they get their money back? There is a chance that they will not.

It is unclear how much SVB currently has to cover uninsured deposits. It is likely not enough. The FDIC has issued a "Receiver's Certificate" to the uninsured account holders with the amount in their account that is not covered by FDIC insurance.

The FDIC said it will pay some of the uninsured deposits by next week by liquidating any additional assets held by SVB. However, if the liquidated assets are not enough, many of SVB's uninsured account holders could lose their money for good.

6. Is this 2008 all over again?

SVB's collapse was the largest bank failure since 2008, when Washington Mutual failed with $307 billion in assets. Its failure, along with the collapse of the Lehman Brother's investment bank, triggered the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Are we in danger of repeating 2008?

Some argue that we are not in danger of another economic catastrophe, simply because SVB holds less than 1 percent of the nation's assets. However, as Glenn warns, there is a danger of banks repeating the same mistakes as SVP.

SVP wasn't the only bank to use its surplus deposits to invest in U.S. Treasuries, which means that other banks are wrestling with the depleted value of their securities investments due to rising interest rates.

Bank of America, for example, lost $109 billion in their securities investments due to rising interest rates, the most among its peers—and Bank of America is no small fish in the ocean of assets.

Other major banks recorded other massive losses in their securities investments due to rising interest rates. JP Morgan Chase lost $36 billion, Wells Fargo lost $41 billion, Citigroup lost $25 billion, and Goldman Sachs lost $1 billion. If the little banks collapse, will they get the same effort and attention from the federal government as the "big guys?"

The critic may argue that these are still small values given the incredibly large amount of assets held in banks nationwide. However, this is missing the point. Major banks have majorly invested in securities since the pandemic-era skyrocketing rate of deposits. Now those investments are depleted in value.

They can either sell those investments at a loss, or they can wait and hope that they will recover over time. However, if those investments are no longer liquid, what happens when their depositors come knocking? Will they have enough liquid assets to cover a massive bank run? These are the lingering questions that our banks need to address.

As Glenn says, this will impact you—it is only a matter of time. What will you do to prepare?