RADIOSeptember 15, 2022

4 ways Democrats are RUINING energy & 5 ways we can save it

It’s not just that America needs more energy to run the nation NOW. But we’ll need much more if we actually want to run the technology of the FUTURE. So, it’s a good thing there’s no knowledge OR physical resource deficits to creating more, low-cost energy in thousands of places around the world, Alex Epstein, author of ‘Fossil Future,’ tells Glenn. Rather, he says, today's energy crisis is due to current political reasons instead. In fact, Epstein lists the four steps Democrats seem to be taking — especially within the Inflation Reduction Act — to ruin American energy. Thankfully, Epstein has the answer to save it. He discusses the 5 steps to his ‘energy freedom platform’ and explains how YOU can become involved to help save American energy too...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So last night, I laid out a kind of bleak look for the future of energy. And I don't think most people understand. We don't need just the energy to run things now. We need more energy to run the technology of the future. And Alex Epstein is with us. He's from the Center of Industrial Progress. Founder and president. And also, the author of a book you must read, it's Fossil Fuel.

And he's come equipped with some real solutions to our energy problem, to be able to stave it off. And, really, all you need is support from the American people. Right?

ALEX: Yeah. The great thing about energy, is there's all the potential to produce low cost reliable energy for billions of people in thousands of places. There's no -- there's no physical resource deficit for doing this, and there's no knowledge deficit.

Human beings know how to produce reliable electricity. Right? We know how to produce energy on a scale of billions of people. We're just being prohibited from doing it politically. Which means that there's a political solution, if we are liberated to be able to do it.

GLENN: So we have -- I mentioned that in Colorado -- I mean, people who have these smart thermostats. I've said for a while. Don't do that.
ALEX: That's a euphemism.

GLENN: Yeah. I know. In Colorado, they had to -- they lost control of their thermostats. And I mentioned that and said, you know, if your right to touch your thermostat is only worth $25 a year to you, good luck. But people are bashing back saying, well, that's because the coal-powered plants went down. And, you know, it was an emergency at the coal-powered plants. Because coal is just not stable.

ALEX: Yeah. We're really in this Orwellian world, right? I mean, the inflation act is called the Inflation Reduction Act. Freedom is slavery. And coal is unreliable. And solar and wind are reliable. Despite the obvious.

GLENN: Right. Right.

ALEX: Yeah. What they always point to, they did this with the Texas blackouts too.

They'll point to some individual failure of some fossil fuel plant. And then say, oh, well, this inherently doesn't work.

But we know that we can produce reliable electricity with fossil fuels, because we've been doing it for generations. And we've done it in all weather conditions. You can do it when it's really cold, when it's really hot. So if you know a fossil fuel plant fails, that's just something about the specific situation. That's not the technology. Solar and wind, they do not produce electricity most of the time, and you can't rely on them, almost any time. That's the basic nature of them. And part of what happens when you see fossil fuel failures is often, they have to account for the intermittency of solar and wind. So they have to cycle up and down, or be shut down and restarted more. Much more than they would be if they were on their own.

And -- or what happens is they'll get defunded, the way the whole subsidies just expanded unfortunately. Is that they defund reliable powerplants, including things like weatherization, say, for natural gas in Texas. So we know that we can -- again, we have all the ability to produce reliable electricity at low costs. We're just not using it because of political factors.

GLENN: Okay. So go over can't five-point plan.

ALEX: So I call this the energy freedom platform. And I encourage politicians of all parties to adopt this opinion unfortunately -- I mean, unfortunately right now, Democrats are not being very good in terms of energy. They almost all supported the inflation act. I think basically all of them did.

GLENN: And, by the way, I played the audio from an activist group, that was a part of this inflation reduction bill.

And they admitted, they were talking to their own supporters. And they were like, look, it's not about inflation.

It's really a green bill. Which we all kind of knew, if you were paying attention.

It's a green bill. It's stuffed with stuff about green energy.

ALEX: Yeah. And we can talk about how -- I mean, I consider that a four-step recipe for destroying American energy basically. Because just very quickly.

So it involves increasing dependence on unreliable electricity. If you want to destroy American energy, that's a good step one. Step two is add taxes and restrictions to fossil fuels, during fossil fuel shortages. That's a good -- that's a good step two. What were the other steps? I mean, it's so bad. Oh, yeah. Increase the power of the EPA to shut down fossil fuel projects. We need more of that, obviously. And then increase the power of environmental justice activists to stop all energy development.

GLENN: And you've just done that the lie the DOJ now.

ALEX: Yeah. They have this four-step thing, which if you're trying to destroy American energy, it's hard to think of a better plan. So let's talk about how to improve American energy, with the Energy Freedom Platform. So I'll give the five, and then we can go into depth in any of one of them.

Okay? So number one is liberate responsible development. Number two is end preferences for unreliable electricity. Number three is reform air and water emission standards to incorporate cost-benefit analysis. This is a really important one for EPA stuff. Number four is liberate -- is rather, reduce emissions long-term, through innovation, not through punishing America.

Through liberating innovation, not through punishing America.

And then number five, which I know you will be sympathetic to, is decriminalize nuclear energy. So we can talk about any of those, but they're all crucial.

GLENN: Okay. Let's just take them one by one real quick.

ALEX: Okay.

GLENN: First one.

ALEX: So liberate responsible development. Energy inherently involves developing the world around us. And yet we have an anti-development movement that is setting energy policy, and running many of these agencies. So there's opposition to development even in the investment world. But in particular, just all these antidevelopment policies that are restricting fossil fuel development, nuclear development, et cetera.

GLENN: So ESG is a good example. Well, ESG is a kind of quasi political. But if you just look at how difficult it is, if you take nuclear. Like how difficult it is to start a nuclear plant.

You know, you say, four years.

Now it takes 16 years. Part of that is you have these antidevelopment so-called green activists that can stop things on a dime. So you really need policies that are pro development. And they're responsible development, if they try to stop endangerment. So you don't want to endanger local people, or endanger some national treasure. But you can't have the idea that it's wrong to develop nature.

And that terrible anti-human idea is at the root of so many of our laws and policies.

So when I go into the details, if people go to EnergyTalkingPoints.com, you'll see there's a lot of specific policies that need to be reformed, that are antidevelopment right now.
GLENN: Okay. All right. Number two.

ALEX: So is end -- end preferences for unreliable electricity.

And on that website, there's something called electricity emergency, which goes into the details.

But basically, right now, we do three things. We have mandates for unreliable electricity. We prefer them in that way. Many states have those. Like my state of California, unfortunately has those.

We have subsidies, which we just expanded under the Inflation Act.

Right? So we did that. And then the most insidious that people don't know, is that we have very unfair pricing. Because there's no cost penalty for selling unreliable electricity into the grid. Now, you think about that. Imagine you have a car company, and you got to charge the same for a car that works a third of the time. And a car that works all the time. That's how the grid works. You get the same alternate for selling unreliable electricity. Reliable electricity. And actually, you get more. Because all the subsidies, that we just extended. So you actually get paid a premium for selling something that is not nearly as valuable. And sometimes unreliable electricity is of negative value. Sometimes if you have too much electricity, you need to off-load it. So this is -- if you pay a premium for you be reliable electricity. Guess what, you get unreliable electricity.

GLENN: Okay. Number three.

ALEX: So this had to do with the air and water emissions standards. So right now, let's look at what the EPA is doing. We have in that article, electricity emergency.

I talk about, there's slated to be 93 gigawatts of coal shutting down, in terms of already announced things. That's almost one-tenth of a reliable capacity.

One-tenth. This is by 2030.

But there's also the threat of 92 more.

So almost a fifth of our reliable capacity. There's a reliability bloodbath that's scheduling to happen. The lion's share of this comes from EPA policies.

So it's EPA deliberately trying to do things that will shut down these coal plants, even though as you've talked about, there's no viable replacement in the pipeline. We have almost no nuclear scheduled. Not nearly enough gas.

So how does the EPA justify this? Well, one thing is they don't use real cost-benefit analysis when they're making decisions. So they'll say, hey, wouldn't it be great to have lower emissions? But they don't think about, what is the cost of that, in terms of what is the cost to human life of an unreliable grid. They're almost incalculable. So the EPA is making these decisions, and they're not giving any consideration to the reliability of the great. So that's an example of you need real cost-benefit analysis.

GLENN: These people -- are there any honest people on this side? I mean, I don't understand how an honest person can look at it and not say, yeah, but this will make things more unreliable. And people will either die from heat stroke, or they will either die freezing in the winter. You know, you can't just have an unreliable grid like this? Is there anybody on the other side that is asking these questions that's honest?

ALEX: I think one. I mean, there are some people who are really anti-energy. So essentially, they're honest. They hide it from the public. They want less power. They want to industrialize. That kind of thing. I think one of the challenges is. I talk about this in chapter one, of Fossil Future. We rely on what I call a knowledge system to give us expert knowledge and guidance on all these specialized areas. And what you have is multiple of these specializations are failing, at the same time. But each specialization thinks the other is doing its job. So, for instance, the electricity people have been hiding the electricity emergency.

They're not acknowledging. Many of the companies have not been acknowledging. You talk behind the scenes, yeah. This is a disaster. But publicly, they won't say anything. The regulators are kind of silent. And so the public thinks, oh, there's not that big a threat. And then the EPA people, they'll distort the science about the side effects of coal.

But they'll kind of think, oh, yeah. We don't have to worry about reliability. Because the isn't saying that.

There's dishonesty kind of everywhere.

But one reinforces the other. I mean, we've got a world, that thought legitimately, you could rapidly eliminate fossil fuels by 2050, and it would work well. This was the mainstream view.

And part of it was there were all these false views, that are being combined. And people have this idea. Well, most people -- the experts, so-called.

The people that were told they're experts. They can't be that wrong. But they can be that wrong in part because what we're told the experts think is usually a massive distortion of what actually the researchers in a field think.

GLENN: Yes. That's happening with global warming, all the time.

ALEX: Oh, yeah. Of course. It's the idea that the world is going to end, if it gets one or 2 degrees warmer on a planet where far more people die of cold than of heat.

The researchers don't think that, but that gets distorted by what I call our knowledge system to make it. Oh, it's an apocalypse. And you have to take a crash emergency action and destroy all your energy. And then the planet will be nice to you. And then life will be great.

GLENN: Give me the fourth one.
ALEX: So the fourth one is --

GLENN: Reduce.

ALEX: Reduce emissions long-term. It's very important. It has to be long-term. Because there's no short-term producing of emissions. That's a pipe dream. So it's reduce CO2 emissions long-term, by liberating innovation, not punishing America.

GLENN: When did we lose that in America?

ALEX: Lose which one?

GLENN: The idea that we innovate our way out of problems? Instead, we're just -- we're just dismantling everything. Instead of saying, you know, hey, we've got -- we've got a food storage problem. And somebody comes up with the refrigerator, you know what I mean? We are already seeing technology, that is -- we have reduced greenhouse gases. Better than anybody else.

And a lot of it is because of new technology.

But we just dismiss that.

ALEX: I just there are a couple of things going on. So one of this is there's this idea that CO2 emissions are an emergency. And when you think of something as an emergency, you need to get rid of it immediately.

And if that's your view. The only thing you can do is just massively destroy human life.

I mean, that's the only way you can do it.

To reduce emissions now, in a world where fossil fuels are 80 percent of the world's energy. In a world that needs vastly more energy, 3 billion people using less electricity per person than one of our refrigerators.

Like, the world is going to be using more fossil fuels for a while. So if you think of it as an emergency, the world is going to end, then you are going to do these crash problems and accept these terrible consequences. Which we're just beginning to see. Because we've only reduced fossil fuels a little bit, compared to what has been asked for, in World Economic Forum, and all these other people. So one is this emergency mindset is really bad.

And it's not justified. We're safer than ever from climate. CO2 emissions have a warming impact and a greening impact. It's not a catastrophic impact. If you want to lower emissions. You have to think of it as a long-term thing. That's the only moral way, and it's the only practical way. China and India will not lower their emissions until there's a cost-effective alternative. Now, the greens say they want cost-effective alternatives. They say they want solar and wind. But notice that their approach is to first restrict fossil fuels. I know you've talked about, and then promise a replacement. That's not how markets work. That's not how freedom works.

GLENN: Right. That's not how anything of common sense works. You don't say, I know all the machines in the hospital are keeping your husband alive, but we're going to try something that's never been done before. So we'll turn off all of those machines. And then hope that something works. That's -- that's insane.

ALEX: But that has been the policy. Part of it has been disguised. They said, to take your analogy. They've said the equivalent of, hey, we have this amazing new machine. We're developing green machines. Right?

But what they didn't say, is their main policy is shutting down the machines that worked. Like, what did Biden do first? Shuts down the Keystone XL Pipeline. Bans leasing on federal lands. He didn't come up with some new energy innovation and prove it.

He shut down, what was -- what was working. And that's the huge prison. And so the approach has to be, you liberate innovation, so you get things like cost-effective nuclear.

But you don't dictate inferior alternatives, and call that innovation. Unfortunately, that's what passes for innovation today. That's what the whole inflation act is about. It's about mandating or coercing us to do these things that don't work.

GLENN: All right. Back in just a second. Now, this is five-step platform. However, we need your help on this.

And it's a -- it's a real thing, that could make the -- a significant difference, and turn things around for us. We'll give it to you, in just a few minutes.

Inflation. Hyperinflation. Recession. Depression. The Great Reset.

Man, if I read one more story out of Europe talking about, well, there's a possibility of nuclear war. The world has gone insane. Finding some security, and a safe place to hide. Look, wherever you are is where you're supposed to be. And you just have to figure out, how to navigate and protect your family the best way you can. In case of a catastrophic, oh, I don't know. Energy crisis. My Patriot Supply is taking $250 off their three-month emergency food kit. Do you know what the price of groceries and the shortage of groceries would have been like, if we -- if we hadn't had saint Biden step to the plate and avert this tragedy of the Amtrak strike?

You -- you might need emergency food, in situations, that you cannot see coming. Please, go to preparewithGlenn.com. Grab your three-month emergency food kit for $250 off the regular price. $250 off today by going to preparewithGlenn.com. PreparewithGlenn.com. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: So you are working with like 100 different legislative offices, correct?

ALEX: Yeah. To various degrees. So two years ago, I was very frustrated by -- I was having success with the public. And I was success with the corporate world. But the political world was just totally ignorant of the kind of pro-human, pro-freedom energy, thinking I had been developing.

And I figured out, like the thing I could do, was I needed to figure out how to give them messaging and policy, in a way that was useful for them.

So I started this website, EnergyTalkingPoints.com. Like, everything on that, can be fit in a tweet. So it's really efficient ways of explaining pro-freedom views.

So if you go there, there's probably thousands of individual talking points, all really well referenced.

And then I found that I got demand for people to get custom help.

So I created something called Energy Talking Points on Demand, where I would have biweekly briefings. And it's just with high-level offices. So it's congressional offices, U.S. Senate offices, and governor's offices.

And so we have about 300 staffers, that are part of it, over 100 offices, and increasing the meetings with the elected officials themselves. I spoke to a group of 20 last time I was in DC. I'm going to DC next week. And what I found there was a real appetite for this. Because many of these offices want to be pro-energy and pro-freedom. But they didn't have the messaging to explain -- to refute all the myths. And also clarity on what to do, going forward.

And that's why I developed the energy freedom platform. Was the clarity on what to do going forward. So what I've been encouraging them to do is, hey, this is a blueprint. You can win on these issues. And you can do something really good. So say Republicans.

Not politically -- not political, really. But let's say Republicans right now, are much more pro-energy. If you guys take over Congress, you need to advocate something positive.

You can't just -- once you take over, you can't just react to negatives.

There's a lot of reacting to negatives, and not a clear having positives. So I would ask your listeners, if they like this, it's really, really simple. Just call your office. Call your office -- oh, are you going to say something?

GLENN: I have got about 20 seconds before we break.

ALEX: Oh, sorry. Just say. Talk to Alex Epstein. Give them my email. Alex@AlexEpstein.com. Just tell the office to email me, and I will set up a call with them, and I'll tell them all about how to use the energy freedom platform.

I have a theory about Trump's nuclear testing…

President Trump recently ordered the Pentagon to resume nuclear testing after Vladimir Putin announced a new underwater nuclear device. Are we heading towards a potential nuclear war, or does Trump have another goal? Glenn Beck explains his theory: Trump just won this fight...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Well, President Trump said yesterday, truly great meeting with President Xi.

This is a the problem. So much is hyperbole is -- truly. Like everybody said that meeting couldn't happen. It happened. And they said couldn't be done. It was done.

I got up this morning. People said I couldn't open the door, and I opened the door. Okay? It was the greatest door opening I've ever seen.
But from all accounts, this was a really, really good meeting.

Let me just say this: He's getting ready to meet with Putin. And with what Putin has done in the last couple of days, and now everybody is upset.

Oh, my gosh. Donald Trump said he's going to start testing nuclear weapons again!

Yeah. Yeah.

You know why?

Well, China is testing them.

And Russia is testing them.

We've had a moratorium on that. And here's what he's really doing. If I -- if I heard the news. And I was in the Donald Trump White House, I would be -- I would have walked in, after I heard the news, especially yesterday.

That Vladimir Putin has a new nuclear missile, that he can shoot 6,000 miles away.

Underwater. And it can navigate, and then blow up like a hydrogen bomb under the water, just off the coast of California, which would create a radioactive tsunami. This is what I would tell the president. Congratulations, Mr. President. You've won.

Now, why would I say that?

Because Vladimir Putin is not going to do that.

He's not going to do that. It would make him the pariah of the entire world. You're not going to set off a nuclear, radioactive tsunami to cover Los Angeles.

Because here's -- if I'm the president, and maybe this would make me a very bad president. But if I'm the president. And I hear that he has just launched a nuclear missile, towards Los Angeles, my decision is: Do I stop it?

Yes, I do everything I can to try to stop the missile from hitting. Do I respond before it hits?

All unconventional wisdom is, you've got to launch now, Mr. President. You have to launch now!

Hmm. Now, maybe this makes me a very bad president. I don't know.

I think it probably does. But I would say, no.

I'm not launching. Let it hit. And then I'm going to say to the rest of the world, immediately after it hits, this man just bird Los Angeles, killed all of these people, by launching a missile, a hydrogen bomb, underwater. God only knows what it's done to the environment.

But here's what it's done to people. And here's what it's done to Los Angeles. I give the world an hour before I respond.

I don't want a nuclear war. Because we all know what that means.

But rest of the world, you need to condemn him, and he needs to go on trial for crimes against humanity.

Nothing -- nothing warrants that kind of abuse of nuclear weapons.

That's what I would do as the president. Because I know the rest of the world, would not be kind to anyone who launched a nuclear weapon at the West Coast.

Wouldn't. If we launched a nuclear weapon, you know, even if we blew up Israel, with a nuclear weapon, the world would be like, look at what America has just!

They've killed all these Jews. Wait a minute. I'm so confused right now, what I'm for and what I'm against. But they would still condemn it.

Nobody can get away with that. He knows. Putin knows, the president is the most concerned about nuclear weapons. So what does he do?
He describes two nuclear weapons he has.

He's pulling out all -- there's nowhere to go from there. What are you going to do next? I'm going to blow up the moon?

He's just used everything in his bag of tricks. There's no place bigger that he can go. Other than actually launching those things. Mr. President, Congratulations, you've just won. So that's what I think is happening with -- with what Donald Trump has done this week. And the way Putin is now reacting. And he's about to turn his sites on Putin and Ukraine.

So let's start and see what happens.

Decoding the Fed rate cut: What it means for you

The Federal Reserve has cut interest rates for the second time in the 2025 fiscal year. Glenn sifts through all the economic jargon and translates it into plain English to explain what this could mean for the average American.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let me talk to you a little bit about the fed rate and what it means. Most people don't spend their evenings reading the Federal Reserve statements. And I don't blame them. Because I don't do it either.

It's like background noise from an alien planet.

The Fed has cut the rate by 25 basis points. I don't even what a basis is or a basis -- what the hell does that even mean? Why should I care about that?

Okay. Let me explain what it is, and why you should care. Because the Federal Reserve -- the quiet, most powerful group in the world has decided to cut rates. And that changes the rules of your financial life. From your mortgage to your job security. From the cost of groceries. To, you know, the health of your savings account.

What they did yesterday is not going to help your savings account. What they did yesterday, will help your job. Okay?

A little bit. Now, think of the Federal Reserve as hmm. I don't know.

The most corrupt bank -- I'm sorry. I mean, the central bank.

Think of it more like the mob that -- think of it like a very credible bank that you don't know who even owns it. Okay?

It is not part of the federal government. It's not a federal agency. That's a really important part. They don't print the money. Not directly. Okay? That's up to the Treasury.

But they control the flow of money, and if the economy slows down, this is what they say they do. Okay?

If the economy slows down or starts to break, the Fed tries to fix it by lowering the Federal Funds Rate.

That's the interest rates that the banks charge each other to borrow money overnight. And when that rate drops, supposedly, borrowing becomes cheaper for you! But does it?

Yes. But it takes time to get to you. When borrowing becomes cheaper, you can start a new business.

You can get a house. You can borrow more money.

And when people borrow more, they spend more. Which in theory, keeps jobs going. People are creating jobs. Businesses start to open up.

Et cetera, et cetera. That's the lever the Fed just pulled again. Twenty-five basis points. That means .25 percent.

It doesn't sound a lot -- like a lot. Especially if your credit card is at 21 percent. Or your car loan is at 8 percent. Or your mortgage is just choking you to death. But it is a small ripple that will go outward. And it may just be the beginning.

So if you own a home, and you have an adjustable mortgage, you'll see a slightly lower rate. Maybe -- maybe you'll save a couple hundred dollars every month. And that's nothing -- you know, that's not nothing. If you have credit card debt -- and this is my favorite part. If you have credit card debt, don't hold your breath. You're not going to see anything. Why?

Oh, because when they're raising the rates. Oh, those banks, they raise it right away. Oh, it costs us so much money to be able to borrow money. And you're going to borrow it from us, so we have to raise that rate right away, because it will cost us money. Once they lower the rate, they're not in any hurry.

They're like, you know what, let's slow down just a little bit. We don't need to lower that interest rate on the credit card, right away.

Remember I said, think of them as a Mafia -- as a really good bank. Okay?

Now, if you're shopping for a car or a small business loan, this could be your window. Because lending is going to get a little bit looser. When the money is flowing a little bit more.

Because the Fed lowers the interest rate. Then the lending gets a little looser. You can buy a car.

If you're retired or you're saving. You know, you have money, you know, in a CD or a savings account, think of this as a move from the Mafia. Your savings account will drop just a little bit. Because your savings. You'll earn less, your CDs, and everything else.

You'll earn less when the interest rates fall. Okay?

So in short, what this means yesterday, is it will help people who are borrowing money. But it will hurt people that are not savers. Now, it's not dramatic. But that's -- you know, going -- interest rate going down hurts people saving money, but helps people borrowing. Interest rates go up, it helps people who save money and hurts the people borrowing money. Okay?

So why is the fed doing this? Well, the president has been saying, can you do this, for quite some time. Because this is what spurs an economy. This is what spurs jobs being created. Because people can borrow money, and they can expand their business.

The reason why they said they did this yesterday is because, quote, the downside risk to employment has risen. What does that mean?

People are losing their jobs. That's what that means. Okay? I don't know why they just can't speak English. You know what, we have to do this because people are losing their jobs. Maybe we need to lower this down, so people can hire some more people. That's what they should say. Inflation, they said, is still somewhat elevated.

Okay. Let me translate again. We don't have -- we don't know our butt from our elbow on what we're doing with inflation.

We're out of magic tricks.

And we still have it tamed inflation. But it's getting better.

Okay. So they're trying to ease the pain of people getting fired or no job creation.

Without setting all of our money on fire.

This is the real trick and the real balance. And when I say setting our money fire. The lower the interest rates. What that means is, they're -- your money will be worth less.

Okay?

But here's the -- here's the bigger move that's buried in the fine print.

They're also stopping the shrinkage of their balance sheet. Love that.

We're just going to stop the shrinkage of our balance sheet.

Okay. What kind magic Fed Viagra are you using here to stop that shrinkage?

What it means is they're done pulling money out of the system. They're going to start adding money back in. More liquidity. More dollars that they throw in, the -- the more fuel.

And it's a soft rolling start from fighting inflation to fighting a slowdown. That's what this is.

Now, here's how it's going to hit you in the real world. If you're living paycheck to paycheck, this might feel like some relief in the short-term. Okay? Maybe your payments start to ease up.

Maybe if you're looking for a car. Maybe you get a little bit more bang for the buck. But this is just a small move in that direction. Maybe credit gets a little more available.

Maybe you can afford a little bit more of a better house.

But here's the hidden cost in the long-term.

Every rate cut makes your dollar worth a little less.

By the way, may I just side note here, Your Honor. I don't know why we accept the Fed saying, "We have a target of 2 percent inflation, every year. Two percent is -- that's our target."

Why shouldn't they be -- why shouldn't they be targeting zero percent inflation? Why do we accept that?

You know what that means? That means 2 percent, two cents on every dollar goes away every year.

I don't know. After ten years, that adds up. Why do we accept that? Because they say it in a way, nobody understands!

And so nobody pays attention. So the prices at the store, they don't fall with things like that. They usually rise.

The assets of the rich, the stock, real estate, they start to inflate again. The working class, once more, will pay for the cure. With the value of their labor. And, but this is how the cycle works. Okay?

When things tighten, the powerful scream louder than the average person, and the Fed listens. They open the money spigot. The markets rally, and the average American gets another inflation hangover at some point. Hopefully, it won't happen, at least right away.

Hopefully, we will balance things out. Because Donald Trump, with what he did in Asia yesterday, there's a huge -- there's a lot of money coming in. And he has reshaped the Western world. This guy is not going to be appreciated for -- if J.D. Vance wins. And just assuming it's going to be J.D. Vance and Marco Rubio as the president.

But if they win, after his first term, and maybe into the second term, if he's given a chance for the second term, that's when you're going to really see everything that Donald Trump is doing right now. You're going to see the effects. And you're going to realize, holy cow. I thought that guy made a huge difference at the time.

Look at what he did. He is a long-time. Long-term player.

He's looking way over the horizon. And this week in Asia was a big, big deal. So let me get back to the Fed rate.

Here's what you need to do. You need to first understand the game. This is not a bailout for you. It's a pressure valve on the system. Okay?

If you have debt, this is a signal, that you can make pay it down fast enough, while the interest rates are starting to ease. Same with our government. Interest rates are going down, don't borrow more money, spend less money. And pay things off faster.

If you have savings, look for hard assets, things that will hold their value. Real estate. Blah, blah.

If you're in business, this might be the window to shore up your position.

Don't overextend yourself. Things are still tenuous. Because this is a pivot.

This is a -- a swingback to cheap money. Hopefully not 0 percent again. But the Fed believes that the storm isn't over. And they're right.

It's not. We're in a very precarious situation between employment and runaway inflation. Now, Javier Milei has tamed this thing. And luckily, Donald Trump and Javier Milei get along, and I hope we take a few more things from Argentina.

But the Fed, almost against their own will, is trying to steer us out of a slowdown. But if we're not careful, it will set us up for another round of inflation. But the pivot point is here from the Fed, and every time they pull that lever, remember, it's -- it's you and your dollar that ends up footing the bill. One paycheck, one grocery bill, one devalued dollar at a time.

But right now, it is important for it to happen, so we balance the losing of jobs, maybe some more job creation is coming our way.

We've lost a lot of jobs just in the last week. Because of AI. And I don't know -- did we talk about this yesterday? I'm not sure we did. This week, there's been two. It's been UPS and Amazon, that have cut, what? About 100,000 jobs between the two of them. That's a lot of jobs.

But notice, it's not the guy on the front line. It's not the guy at the dock. Right now, it seems to be the white-collar worker. So the guy who didn't go to college right now, right now, is more safe than the one who did go to college and is trying to pay off all of that stuff. They're being replaced by AI before the dock worker is.

So if you didn't go to college, now is the time to go, suckers!

Because you don't to have worry about all the things that the people that are still paying for that they can no longer use.

Why this Deep State spy campaign is the WORST scandal of my lifetime

According to the records released now by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and the House Judiciary Committee, The Biden era DOJ and special counsel Jack Smith drove an investigation that sprayed subpoenas like a firehose. There were 197 subpoenas sent to 34 people, over 160 businesses, and vacuumed up communications tied to more than 400 Republican individuals and entities. Fox News, Turning Point USA, OAN, all engulfed in what has been called "Operation Arctic Frost." And all this was predicated on NEWS CLIPS?! Glenn explains why this Arctic Frost is MUCH worse than Watergate.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: While we're talking about winter, let's talk about Arctic Frost. That's the code name. And according to -- according to the records released now by senator chuck Grassley and the -- and the House Judiciary Committee. The Biden era DOJ and Special Counsel Jack Smith drove an investigation that sprayed subpoenas like a firehose. We now know, there were 197 subpoenas, spanning more than 1700 pages. Sent to 34 people. One hundred sixty-three businesses, and then vacuumed up communications, tied to more than 400 Republican individuals and entities.

Okay? That's reaching into everything. They reached into media companies. CBS, Fox, Fox Business, NewsMax, Sinclair, into financial institutions, into political organizations.

Even members, employees, and agents of the legislative branch. So now you have congressmen and senators being vacuumed up into this whole thing.

This is not a precision rifle shot. This is a net and a very big dragnet.

Okay? This is not the way justice in America works. You do not go after, you know, an entire party, 400 people? Now, what were they looking for? How did it start?

Well, let me say, the opening memo to justify Arctic Frost is to call -- does in legal terms, it would be called the predicate.

And it was stamped sensitive investigative matter, okay?

And it's cited. And I love this. Listen to this language. It's cited, evidence suggest a conspiracy around alternate electors.

I'll get to that here in just a second. But it -- it relied on -- leaned on news clips. News clips!

To vacuum all these people up, to get the -- to get the engine turning. News clips were used.

Suggesting, not proving. Suggesting, and it just rose up the ladder.

Ray, Garland, Monaco, even coordination with the White House counsel's office. It surfaces now in the record. This went all the way to the top.

This is not my language. This is what the documents now on the table imply.

Okay? Now, let me just pause for a minute, in the reading room of American memory. What is this all about?

Alternate electors. That's not a Martian invention. Okay?

That's not something completely foreign. We've seen it before. 1876, and 1960. They were messy. Contested. Deeply political moments that produced zero criminal prosecutions for their existence of rival slaves.

In fact, Al Gore, if he didn't set an alternate slate of electors, he was counseled, and I've talked to Dershowitz about this.

He said, they're counseled to have an alternate set of electors. Because once -- if you don't do that, and the tables turn and you're like, you know what, there was a problem -- if you haven't ceded those electors before a certain time, you have no case. You can't change anything. So it has to happen. And it has happened two times before, I think three, but definitely in 1876 and 1960.
In Hawaii, in 1916, Democrats signed certificates while a recount was still underway. The recount flipped. So it was ultimately certified. The democratic slate was certified. Ugly? Yes. But that's the way it worked.

It's not criminal. And history has said no. It's not criminal.

But it doesn't matter, when it's about Donald Trump. So let me go back to Arctic Frost thousand. As the subpoenas flew, the FBI reportedly snooped phone records of Republican members of Congress!

The scope widened to donor analytics. Broad financial data. Trump world advisers.

The lawyers. The media contacts. We said, during January 6, we said, internally, if you don't think they are going after a massive tree, because remember, this is -- this is what the Patriot Act allows you to do now.

You go after one person. If anybody is calling somebody else, well, that person now can be Hoovered up. And who has that person called?

So you can get pretty much everybody that you want, with one subpoena.

But that's not where they stop. They didn't stop with one subpoena. Okay?

When the state casts a dragnet over the opposition's political ecosystem with the authority to seize all their communications, compel testimony, and chill the donors, that's not tough politics.

Okay?

That is the government, with badges and grand juries, leaning its full weight into one side of the national scale.

Watergate. Please!

Watergate. Let me compare Watergate. You know what Watergate was?

Watergate was a gang of political operatives who broke into an office to get information. They weren't even. They weren't even losing the election. Nobody even knows why they would even do this. It is so stupid that they would even do this. But it was a local office. They broke in. They wanted to get some information that was there, you know, on the -- on the candidate and on the race.

And then they covered it up.

And they tried to keep the public from the truth.

It was wrong!

It was criminal.

And it forced a president to resign. And people went to prison over it. But Watergate was a private burglary, executed by a campaign, and covered up. By the White House.

Terrible!

Awful.

That's not the DOJ blanketing the opposing party's entire world, with federal subpoenas while citing news hits as the predicate.

Do you see the difference?

Watergate was an attempt to weaponize a campaign. Arctic Frost, if the emerging records hold, was the attempt to weaponize the entire state against a political party.

The difference there is the whole ball game. Under a constitutional republic.

You don't have a constitutional republic, if that's allowed to happen.

In America, the state is supposed to be the neutral referee. Not a sideline enforcer wearing one team's colors under the stripes.

And don't even start with me on, well, what about Donald Trump?

We'll play that game all day long. And you know where that gets us?

Nowhere. You want to make a charge against Donald Trump and what he's doing.

Good. Let's take that separately.

Let's do that. I'm willing to. Let's take that separately. Let's deal with this one, first. Okay? The moment the referee picks up the ball and starts running, the game is over!

It's not a fair game anymore. And if it can be done to them, today. It will be done to you, tomorrow.

That's not a slogan. That's a law of political gravity.

Yeah. But Trump did -- okay. Let's have that conversation.

But can we at least have it honestly?

Because if you think this is about, whataboutism. You believe so see the nose on the front of your face.

You're completely missing this.

You cannot make a weaponization of a government, a partisan inheritance that each side can claim when it holds power.

If any president, any prosecutor red, or blue, uses federal power to criminalize political opposition, rather than prosecute clear crimes.

It is an offense gets an equal protection under the law. So let's -- let's lay down a standard here, that I'm willing to apply to Donald Trump and to Joe Biden and any other president that comes our way. Because if we don't lay this clear standard down, we're done.

The predicate. Predication. It has to be real. Not rhetorical.

Evidence suggesting via TV interviews, is circular sourcing, at its best.

It's not something that you launch a sprawling investigation on into a presidential rival's universe. If you can't articulate the crime, specifically, you don't get to launch a dragnet on the people that are running against you!

The scope has to be narrow, and tied exactly to the alleged crime!

Not a sweep through media organizations, and donor records, and opposition infrastructure, under vague theories, that come from TV reports!

Journalism.

Political advocacy.

Fundraising.

All of those things are protected activities. Separation from the White House, also must be unmistakable. If the White House Counsel's office is coordinating device transfers into an investigation of its chief political rival, alarms should clang in every corridor of every main justice call hall.

Everywhere! The alarm -- the Claxton should be going off right now. Also, historic practice matters!

If prior episodes -- by the way, this was all thrown out by the Supreme Court. So you know. Okay? Nothing there.

If prior episodes, 1876, 1960, and I believe 2000. If they were treated as political, not criminal, especially where alternate electors were explicitly conditional, then you need compelling new legal theories and clean facts to criminalize it now.

You can't just say, yeah, well, history, never did anything about it before. And, actually, they said it was fine.

But now, now it's going to be a crime.

Wait. Can you be specific on what has changed? Well, we really just liked the people that are doing it this time. That doesn't count. That doesn't count.

Now, before anybody clips this monologue and screams, so Glenn Beck said, nobody -- the Trump administration did anything wrong. Well, I don't think so.

But that's not what I'm saying, because I'm not the judge. I'm not your juror. I'm the guy insisting that the rules are rules, and they should be applied to everyone on all sides.

Smith has his report. He says, he wants to tell his side. Great! Put him under oath. If he didn't do it, then he should be set free.

But it should be on a clear set of laws! What's happened in the Biden administration, they just kept changing laws. Well, yeah. I mean, the bank said there was no crime. But Donald Trump. And so all of a sudden, there was a crime.

Nobody has ever been prosecuted. Ever before that. Even the bank said, this is ridiculous.

There's no crime here.

It didn't matter.

That's not justice.

I want real justice. Smith says he has a side, let's hear it. Bring forward the memos. Publish the predicate. Let the country see where weather we had a criminal case or an election cycle dragnet. Because that's what it looks like. If the emerging picture looks like, if the Arctic Frost opened up on thin evidence, escalated on political pressure, and metastasized into a government-wide sweep of the sitting president's chief rival and his entire ecosystem, then this is not just like Watergate. This is much, much, much worse than Watergate. In kind.

Not just degree.

Watergate tried to steal the information. That's it. They potentially attempted to steal legitimacy to criminalize opposition by wielding the sword of the state.

That violates, you know, more than statutes. That violates our creed, that free men govern themselves by consent, and the process is sacred. And the law is the wall that even presidents and prosecutors can never climb over. If proven, the remedy is not a sternly, terse letter, or an op-ed, and a shrug.

The remedy is the full force of the law. Inspector general referrals. Special counsels where appropriate, prosecution where crimes are clear. Statutory reforms to bar this from ever happening again from -- from press clippings?

Being your predicate? Bright lines need to be drawn. Protections for the press, for donors, and legislators in political cases. Sunlight. All the sunlight on how this began, who approved it, and why no one in the administration said stop.

And to my friends saying, well, Trump is doing the same thing. I hear you. I don't agree with you, but I hear you. Why don't we codify the guardrails right now?

So when emotions are high and temptations are strong, the republic doesn't survive by trusting that our guys will be angels. It survives on the chains on power. Everyone's power.

You know, when I hold a founding sermon in your hand, when you read the ink of Washington scratched in the margin notes of James Madison. You discover that America's miracle wasn't that we selected saints. It's that we built a system where even the sinners are fenced in by law.

That's the process. When justice is blind, to banners and bumper stickers and political parties, that's when America is America. Arctic Frost. If the record stands, it took a blowtorch to that fence.

So the choice is really simple. Retreat into teams. Each side cheering for its prosecutors. And its dragnet. Or you can do the harder, nobler thing, just like our founders did. And insist that the same rules that bind all power, especially when it's aimed at people that we dislike, are enforced. That's how you keep a republic.

That's how you make sure that there's not a second Watergate. Because we learned the lesson the first time. But it we?

Because if we haven't. If we don't learn it this time, and by God, we are done!

The story of America is not a story of who got whom. It's a story of the people who refuse to let the government become a weapon. And if that spirit still lives in us, then this cold wind called Arctic Frost will pass. And the Constitution will withstand. Because you stood for equal justice. For due process. For truth. That doesn't bend to politics.

And that, that is how we relight the torch of America!

Disease-Infested Monkeys LOOSE in Mississippi?!

A truck carrying 21 'aggressive' monkey's allegedly infected with contagious diseases such as COVID-19, herpes, and Hepatitis C crashed in Mississppi, causing the monkey's to be let loose. While most of the threat was taken care of, one monkey is reported to still be on the loose. This sounds eerily similar to the beginning of an outbreak movie...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Big thing some good news. Let's start with some good news.

President Trump has just -- is touring Asia and making all kinds of deals.

Donald Trump is single-handedly reshaping the earth!

He really is. He is reshaping everything. Single-handedly.

STU: Big job.

GLENN: I know. He's done more than The Great Reset did with all of that money. All of the campaigns. Everything that they were doing.

Listen to this. What he's just done. Signed a framework agreement, August 28th, between Trump and the Japanese Prime Minister, mutual stockpiling of rare-earth elements, REEs. Okay?

To ensure supply security. That's Japan. Cooperation with international partners, US allies, to shield the supply chain from disruptions.

The goal is to reduce China's 90 percent control over the global rare earth minerals.

For tech, EVs, defense, and AI. Okay. They have a 90 percent stranglehold.

So that's what he did in Japan. Now, also bundle that with the 550 billion dollar strategic investment from Japan, in the US. Including a 490 billion-dollar launch phase. 200 billion for nuclear AI and energy projects, small modular reactors with Westinghouse and Mitsubishi, and supply chain boosts in critical minerals.

Trump tied that to the tariffs. Japan got an auto import tariff slashed from '27 to 15 percent in exchange for the investments. In two weeks in the last two weeks, listen to what he has done. He has made multiple pacts with allies. Australia, critical minerals framework, mining processing, and rare earth mineral recycling scrap. Then in Japan, I just told you, Malaysia, he just did a memo of understanding on critical mineral diversification. In Ukraine, a ten-year access to titanium and rare earth minerals.

In Thailand, an MOU on rare earth mineral supply. Add that to what else he has done. He is -- he is outflanking China. He is trying to break the back of China! He is friend shoring, is what he's actually doing.

He is -- he is putting all of this emphasis on rare earth minerals. He's cutting Asia away from China.

He's cutting Europe away from China. He's cutting South America away from China. He has moved all of the resources of rare earth minerals to us. Anything outside of China, is coming our way now!

That is massive! Massive! We were sitting ducks with rare earth minerals, six months ago, a year ago. Total sitting ducks! They had everything coming their way. We were not doing any kind of -- any kind of strategic thinking on this, at all!

And this isn't piecemeal. This is operation warp speed for rare earth minerals. He is -- the guy is so ahead of everyone else. He is reshaping global trade and permanently, hopefully, sidelining China.

So we are never having to put our hand out to China.

It's remarkable, what is happening. Just remarkable! Now, let me give you another story.

A truck halling 21 monkeys to a testing facility in Florida, overturned in Mississippi.
(laughter)

STU: How did -- how did we make this jump? Has he signed a memorandum of understanding with the monkeys?

GLENN: Nope. Nope. They're still negotiating. According to the Jasper county sheriff's office, the accident occurred on Interstate 59, near the 117 mile-marker just north of Heidelberg. Six recess monkeys from Tulane University escaped. Officials said, five of the six that escaped have now been destroyed.

We've been in contact with an animal disposal company to help handle the situation. The Mississippi Department of Wildlife Fisheries and Parks and I guess now monkeys is still looking for one diseased monkey, still on the loose.

STU: A hundred percent, the beginning of an outbreak movie. That's exactly how it happens. The one gets away. Oh, we've got five of the six. What's the big deal?

GLENN: What was the one. What was the movie with -- oh. What's his name?

Tommy -- remember, he was the escaped convict. He was the doctor, and they were hauling him. He was the doctor from Ohio.

Based on a true story. And he -- they're hauling him. And he escapes. He has to try to prove himself innocent. Remember?

STU: Fugitive?

GLENN: Fugitive. Yeah. That's right.

STU: I was looking for a deep cut there.

GLENN: Fugitive. Sorry, I couldn't remember. It's a fugitive, and outbreak. That's what this is.

STU: That would be a good movie. I wouldn't want this in real life.

GLENN: I prefer a lot of this to not happen in real life.

STU: What are the diseases? We have help C going on?

We have COVID. I think there's three of them. Help C. COVID. And what was the other one? Herpes.

What happens if we combine all three into one monkey, and then release it into the wild?

What could possibly go wrong?

GLENN: Let me tell you something.

You know, we are in real trouble. I mean, I hate to bring this up too. Okay. Did you need diseased monkeys on the loose today from me?

No. No. Can I make it worse?

Absolutely, I can make this worse.

You know when we have the COVID thing. And we were all like, we shouldn't have these labs everywhere, you know.

STU: Oh. Like the labs.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Gain-of-function research, and things like that.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

We've built hundreds of new labs now. Hundreds of new labs. There are more than 35 hundred BSL3 and over 110BSL4. Bio safety level four laboratories. And all of them are now working on pathogens that could kill all of us.

So a 2025 journal of public health study reveals over90 percent of the countries that operate these labs have no oversight whatsoever!

STU: All of them are working on diseases that can kill us all?

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: There's not one that is doing yogurt flavors or something?

There's not one.

GLENN: No. There's not. There's not one. I wish there were!

You know, they keep saying, these are shields from -- no. These are match sticks. That's what these labs are. These are giant match sticks.

And we're sitting in a bunch of kindling -- they're -- they say they're developing vaccines. But what they're really doing is enhancing the viruses. Which, when I say enhancing, what that really means, they're weaponizing viruses. So don't worry. You know, it's just gain of function, which translated is, loss of sanity.

STU: I mean, because the research makes me very nervous. I mean, the fact that we have more labs that have higher safety standards. In theory, should be -- that was one of the problems with the COVID outbreak. Right?

They were doing research that should have been done at a BSL4. BSL1 and BSL2.

So, I mean, having more fours, that could be good, right?

GLENN: Eh. Did you see the BSL4 in China? In Wuhan?

STU: Well, I think that was the issue, it wasn't a BSL4.

GLENN: I think they called it a BSL4, and then it wasn't one.

STU: I don't think it was. Do we have a BSL4 for monkey research? I think really --

GLENN: I'm not really sure -- I know Georgia.

STU: Don't transfer it. Keep it in one place. You don't need to transfer them anywhere.

GLENN: In Atlanta, they're doing -- they're building another 150,000 square feet of a BSL4 in -- in Atlanta. So that's the place, oh, yeah, where all the zombies will be. Can I just tell you a quick little story? 1979. Soviet Union.

You know, they're trying to maintain this BSL4. They're not very good at it. Because, you know, they're not good at anything in 1979 in Russia.

STU: Except for nuclear power.

GLENN: Exactly right.

Okay. So there was a cloud released from this bio safety level lab four.

No flames. No alarms. Just a faint, invisible mist. It's kind of like hmm, my teenage son's farts. It's invisible, and it's deadly.

STU: Okay. Hmm.

GLENN: And it was carrying anthrax spores, okay? From the weapons lab.

Well, people began to die, clearly. We don't know how many. They think hundreds. Entire families suffocated because the bacteria devoured their lungs. And they were like, I have no lung!

GLENN: Okay. And the Kremlin was like, not happening. What do you say?

People were eating tainted meat. That's what's happening.

And it's eating their lungs.

STU: They Chernobyled it.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay.

So for a decade, nobody really knew what was going on, until the fall of the Soviet Union, and then people were going in. And they were like, oh! Here's what happened.

In one of these bio safety labs, a technician failed to replace an air filter properly.
And that was -- that -- just that allowed this microscopic storm of death to be released into the air.

I don't know! I mean, if your air filter not being installed properly can kill a bunch of people. And only tainted meat. McDonald's. I don't know. I don't -- I don't really think that we should -- we have them all over. 149 nations have them now.

149.

STU: There's definitely not 149 nations that should have stuff like that.

GLENN: You don't think so?

STU: No. I don't even think I can name 149 nations.

GLENN: Try this one. In India, the labs now are experimenting with the Crimean Congo viruses. Fatality rate of 75 percent.

In Russia, under its sanitary shield initiative, they are building 15 new BSL4 sites. In Brazil, Project Orion, a high-containment complex integrated with its particle accelerator.

Oh. And as I said, Atlanta, 160,000 square feet.

Apparently, we don't have enough room for all the monkeys that we're releasing in all the wild. And eventually, we'll find. And put them in there.
And torture them. Or do whatever it is we do. No international body tracks or regulates what's happening in any of these fortresses. What the hell is wrong with us?

STU: We should note an international body does not necessarily solve the problem.

I mean, as we've seen -- when they do monitor it, they usually import people to rape the citizens around the facilities.

GLENN: Exactly right. But you know what I'm really sick of it? There's no international body that does anything, except just let these people put really bad things into our body!

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Can we -- can we stop with this?

STU: We're good with this on our own. Put all sorts of things in my body. That should not have been in there.

We're good at doing that.

As Americans, on our own. We don't need your help.

GLENN: I really -- just stop.

The arrogance. The arrogance of these -- hey, you know what, we need to fiddle with some more viruses. And let's make a digital God that we can't control!

What the hell is wrong with us?

STU: Especially when the digital God that we can't control can make new viruses.

GLENN: Exactly right! Exactly right.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And maybe -- maybe -- maybe what we do, is we put it into a self-driving car. And it directs. And monkeys just start flying out of everyone ever seen butt.