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.

THIS is what the media should show you from Gaza

Hamas has released footage of a starving hostage who says he’s digging his own grave… so, where is the media outrage? Glenn Beck reviews the photos, which look eerily like they were taken at Auschwitz during the Holocaust. Plus, he reviews the story of an East Jerusalem resident who found a way to give aid to the Gazan people while bypassing Hamas and private contractors, who have turned hunger into “a business.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Now, I don't know if you saw the living skeleton hostage, the video that came out on Friday. Of the Hamas hostage.

It is -- it's really sick. I've only seen the pictures. I haven't seen the video.

But the pictures of this guy, who was buff. And really healthy looking. I mean, he looked really -- like he was really in shape.

He was out at the -- you know, at the concert, there in -- there in Israel.

And at the concert, he's one of the guys that was grabbed by Hamas.

They released a five-minute clip of him.
He's 24 years old. He's in a tunnel, he's standing in this tunnel with a ceiling as high as he is. They show him crossing off dates on a calendar, and digging a grave. He says, I haven't seen for a few days in a row. And if you look at him, he's nothing, but skin and bones.

I haven't seen a Jewish person look like this, since the Holocaust.

I mean, that is the image that I think -- that Hamas is trying to send to the world.

Because I think they're proud of all of this. In the middle of the video, a person behind the camera hands them a can of beans. And David said, this can is for two days. This whole can is for two days, so I don't die. This is the grave that I think I'll be buried in. Time is running out.

This is the deliberate starvation, of this hostage.

And you would say, well, the kids are starving. Now I -- let me tell you another story. I want to read this one verbatim.

When much of the world had written off Northern Gaza as unreachable, 30-year-old east Jerusalem resident, Sara Awatta and her team, carved out a lifeline. Under the umbrella of Mena Aid, a regional partner coalition operating through the multi-faith alliance and in coordination with Israeli authorities, she built a system, that moved hundreds of trucks of food and supplies into Gaza bypassing Hamas and private contractors, who had turned hunger into a business.

Did you catch that line? Bypassing Hamas and private contractors, who had turned hunger into a business. More than 100,000 families have been fed.

The cost? Her own safety.

Quote, I never imagined, that I would be creating safe, independent, humanitarian route, would become the reason my life might end, said Sara.

After delivering 346 trucks of aid, between September '24 and February '25, we have reached 100,622 families. We decided to scale up distribution on June 30th, at a time when no one was able to get anything into Gaza because of looting, chaos, and multiple layers of obstruction on the ground.

Operating through Mena Aid, her team designed an alternative route to deliver food and essential supplies.

In Israel, a trusted logistics company transported the goods from the Port of Ashdod to the Curam Shalome (phonetic) and Zitkum (phonetic) crossings. Inside Gaza, another logistics partner handled the transport, while her staff, coordinating to realtime with Israel shadowed every shipment.

Once the aid crosses into Gaza, it's picked up by another trusted logistics partner.

Our teams are present, during the off-loading, and accompany the aid from the crossing to secure warehouses. Inside the warehouses, we begin distribution immediately, aiming to deliver everything the same day. And at most, within two to three days.

Nothing is allowed to sit idle.

That level of control, allowed them to achieve what few others could, reaching northern Gaza where people had not seen a stable supply of food for months.

Her breakthrough exposed a darker reality.
An economy where hunger itself has become a business.
Now, this is reporting. That she says, quote, there's a lot of private sector businessmen.

Some associated with Hamas. And other political groups.

By the way, this is not somebody who lives in the Jewish quarter of Israel.

She's living in the Islamic quarter of Jerusalem.

They tried to use -- they try to use aid to make millions of dollars.

Because there's such a shortage of goods, and prices are so high.

Some steal aid, and sell it in the market.

Others try to take over the supply route, so they can resell it. Her team's success, threatened by those who profit from scarcity.

By flooding the market with free goods, they not only fed families, but also drove down the inflated prices charged for basics like sugar and flour.

If there's no sugar in Gaza, and we bring it in for free. They can't keep selling it at outrageous prices. So we became their problem.

Israeli authorities also tried to cut off these private sector schemes, by shutting down the routes that allowed commercial profiteering. Listen to that. Did you -- have you heard anywhere, New York Times?

While this helped curb some corruption, it also made the remaining humanitarian channels, more dangerous. The private sector was blocked. And so those who lost their profits, started trying harder to threaten and infiltrate the humanitarian route.

They couldn't control it. So they tried to break it, and me. The attacks on her came quickly.

I began receiving death threats, not just from Gaza, but from the West Bank. Heartbreakingly, some came from people I once trusted. One of the most painful betrayals come from someone close to her. She said, I even discovered I was in a relationship full of lies. That person was part of a game, that wanted to exploit the aid operation, and he tried to use me too.

But I stood firm. I made sure he and people like him never got near it.

And now my life is at risk. Because I refuse to let the private sector hijack aid for commercial gain, or let political actors bend it to serve their goals.

The families she helps, are the reason she refuses to quit, she said.

We've created distribution model, based on verified beneficiary lists, using ID checks to ensure fair and dignified access to food. People stood in line calmly, organized, and even in impossible conditions. That's something the media just doesn't show.

The dignity and patience of the people.

Now, why isn't everyone covering this woman?

I want to get this woman on the phone, if possible. I want to talk to this woman. I would feel very comfortable in helping raising money for her. She's somebody who understands that there is a problem.

That's the only reason why people are not saying, hey, we can't -- we can only do so much with the food thing in Gaza. Because it's hijacked. It's hijacked, and used for political purposes. Do you think the Hamas fighters look like the guy in the tunnel?

No, of course not. Absolutely not. Why?

Because they have the food.

They're only giving it to people, they want to give it to. They're controlling everything.

They're -- they're -- honestly, Hamas, they're animals. They're animals.

But I don't have a problem with people from Gaza. Children. Women.

Now, I don't know if they're part of Hamas or what.

But, I mean, I don't mind helping feed them, if the food is actually being distributed.

But it hasn't been.

This woman seems to be distributing the food.

Carving out a lifeline. And risking her life to do it.

Thank you, Fox news, for bringing this story to my attention.

It's fabulous!

43-year-old prediction proves how WRONG the media is

Glenn and Stu review a 43-year-old prediction from CBS’ Dan Rather, where he claimed that much of Florida would be underwater soon due to global warming. Plus, they reveal the reason we KNOW the global elites don’t really fear climate change.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. This is not going to age well.

It's something that should have been said to Dan Rather about 43 years ago. Stu just found this video.

STU: Yeah, it kind of went viral over the weekend, and I just happened to notice it. And it was just a callback.

It's interesting to always look back at what people were saying, the people you were supposed to understanded and trust had been -- the evidence about what could go on in the future.

They outline many, many times, what they believed is going to happen. And every once in a while, they are a little too specific. Like, they get into specifics. If you're going to make claims of future doom, the appropriate way, if you want to maintain your -- you know, save face if things go wrong.

Is to kind of keep it general and vague.

Which a lot of times they'll do in the global warming world.

They will say really bad things are coming.

And they won't be particularly specific.

Just general horror is around the corner.

GLENN: Right. And they will do it within 100 years. And you'll see the beginning of his in 100 years. So all of us will be dead.

STU: Yeah, so Dan Rather -- this is back in the '80s, forty-three years ago, talking about, what was around the corner here with new evidence from scientists, and look out for what's coming.

VOICE: Concerned about rising temperatures on planet earth, heated up a hearing here in Washington today.

For years, scientists have theorized about the dangers of the so-called greenhouse effect, the warming of the earth's atmosphere, due to the burning of coal and oil. And in recent months, as David Cowan reports, research has uncovered facts to support that theory.

STU: Oh.

VOICE: Many scientists claim that the temperature of the earth's atmosphere has been rising over the past 100 years. That the great sheets of pack ice in Antarctica are melting at a much more rapid rate than previously. Finally, that the sea level has been rising with increasing swiftness over the past 40 years.

If these scientists are correct, about 25 percent of Florida would be flooded, along with low-lying areas all over the world.

Climate changes could produce widespread destruction of agriculture.

The American farm belt might be too dry, and the weed and corn crops would have to move to Canada. Scientists blame the odorless, colorless, carbon dioxide gas for these potentially dangerous changes around the planet. It is the greenhouse effect. The gas allows sunlight to filter down and warm the earth.

But like the glass of a greenhouse, the carbon dioxide tends to trap heat so that it cannot rise into space.

STU: Oh, no. Oh, no.

GLENN: The scientists maintain that the coal, oil, and gas that we've been burning for 100 years have produced more and more carbon dioxide, and helped overheat the earth.

Now, some political leaders endorse the demands for more CO2 monitoring stations like this one in Hawaii.

STU: By the way, the politician was Al Gore in 1982. Making these claims.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

STU: So 25 percent of Florida, underwater. Glenn, I don't know if you could look around.

GLENN: We laugh, because it showed the map of the United States, and then it showed the map of Florida.

And Florida was just like this little stick that came out of the bottom. It's ridiculous. It was like America had a bike stand all of a sudden. Just ridiculous.

STU: Yeah. Basically, only if you were in Central Florida, would you have any civilization left. Now, you see, we would not have any agriculture in our country. All of it would have to go to Canada, which you might know. Consider we have been talking a lot about international trade lately, we actually have -- we produce a heck of a lot when it comes to agriculture here in this country.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: All of these claims, of course, didn't come true.

In fact, the coastline of Florida remains one of the best places to buy a home, in the country.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: Most expensive places to buy a home in the country.

People are moving to Florida by the millions.

GLENN: You know, if global warming was true. And the coastlines were going away. No bank, and no insurance company in the world, would underwrite a loan.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Nobody. Nobody would.

Why would you write a 25-year-old mortgage on a house, that if in 25 years, it would be 10 feet underwater. That would be the dumbest thing you could ever do.

Why would you do it?

Because they know.

You know, money doesn't talk, it screams.

And when money is still says, no. Go ahead. Build their 25-year loan. You know this is a bunch of bullcrap. It's just bullcrap.

STU: Yeah. These aren't just small investments.

30 years after this Dan Rather report.

You wrote a book. A best-seller for a while. Called An Inconvenient Book. There was a chapter about global warming. It wasn't all about Al Gore's -- it wasn't a parody of Al Gore's book. But that was the first chapter in the book. The picture that was taken for the first page of that was a picture of the Miami skyline. Which is -- you know, back -- this is 2006ish, maybe.

And it's just flooded with cranes. All you see is cranes all over the entire skyline.

There's so much destruction going on in Miami. You can't believe it.

Of course, a couple years ago after that. 2008. There was a collapse. We've had COVID in between there.

And in between this entire period, there have been multiple additional construction moves in Miami.

The picture that is in that book. It's so outdated. There's double and triple the amount of skyscrapers that have been built in this area.

GLENN: No.

It's underwater.

STU: Yeah. If it was going to be underwater.

If people actually believed it was going to be underwater, there's no way they would be investigating this type of money into developing Miami and other coastline communities.

It would make no sense.

They all know this isn't true. Or they believe that humanity would come up a solution to it. Right?

Which is also a real possibility.

Like, there are times where there have been -- there are a lot of areas that have problems with flooding. That have generally speaking, been controlled because of human innovation.

This is usually what happens in these situations. So even if they're right. I mean, I don't think 25 percent of Florida has any chance of being underwater.

But even if this -- that problem gets worse, and sea levels do rise a few more inches than expected. Humanity typically has a way of dealing with that.

Did Trump just SLAP Fed Chair Jerome Powell into submission?

President Trump recently visited the Federal Reserve’s headquarters, where they’re spending a lot of taxpayer money on renovations – and Trump let Fed Chair Jerome Powell know he doesn’t approve! Glenn Beck analyzes how Trump used old school power dynamics – including giving Powell a slap on the back – as a negotiation tactic to hopefully get the Fed to lower interest rates.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Did you watch Powell and Donald Trump?

STU: Yeah. Yes.

It was -- it was a fun -- it was a fun moment, I felt like.

GLENN: Let me play you just a clip, yesterday.

Donald Trump went to the federal research, first time, I think in two decades that the fed -- that the president has made an official visit to the Federal Reserve.

STU: Yeah. It was George W. Bush, right?

GLENN: Yeah. So he comes in, and he's getting a tour in hard hats.

Throughout the Federal Reserve. Because they're making a trillion and a half dollar renovation of the Federal Reserve.

Trillion and a half dollars.

STU: Not trillion and a half.

GLENN: No. I'm sorry. Trillion and a half.

STU: Because that would be --

GLENN: But billion does not sound like a lot anymore.

Does it? So a billion and a half renovation.

So you know, Donald Trump said yesterday. That he redid the old post office. And made it into a really nice hotel.

And remember, bathrooms and kitchens are the most expensive.

It had like 200 marble slab bathrooms in it.

For 200 million.

So this is quite the renovation. That the Federal Reserve is doing. On your tax dollar.

STU: You can complain.

You might say, Donald Trump. All the people in the media.

He doesn't know enough about this. He doesn't know enough about that.

He knows enough about this.

Anyone who knows enough about renovating a building.

GLENN: Yeah. So listen here's the back and forth between Trump and Powell.

DONALD: It looks like it's about 3.1 million. It went a little bit, or a lot.

So 2.7. You know, 3.1.

And it just came out.

GLENN: So he takes out. No, that's what it is. And he takes out a sheet.

Like, here, Powell, here it is.

DONALD: Yes.

GLENN: Awkward.

DONALD: You're including the renovation.

VOICE: You just added a third building. That's a third building.

DONALD: It's a building being built.

VOICE: It was built five years ago. More than five years ago.

DONALD: Part of the overall work --
so take a look, you'll see what's happening.

And it's got a long way. You expect any more additional --

VOICE: Don't expect them. We're ready for them.

GLENN: We're ready for them. With our tax dollars, okay?

STU: It's an amazing clip for 100 different reasons.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. And when they first met, I don't know. Do we have the video of him just being slapped on the back?

Look at this. Watch.

DONALD: He has a long way to go.

VOICE: Are there things that they would say to you today, that would make you back off some of the earlier things?

DONALD: Well, I would them to lower interest rates.

GLENN: Huh?

Okay. This is Donald Trump. This is the way -- that visit was all about intimidation. Okay? The slapping on the back, the aggressive handshakes that he gives. Okay? I mean, that's the guy that he is.

And it's not -- it's just the guy he is, and he dominates a room.

You walk into any room with Donald Trump. Even before he's president. He controls the room.

He just does. He's a guy who just walks in, and all the oxygen goes right to him. It's an amazing thing to watch.

STU: Yeah, these are old-school power dynamics. Right?

GLENN: Yes, but they work. They work.

STU: They work. Because you watch that clip. There's no reason to have that moment in front of cameras.

GLENN: Nope!

STU: There's -- that was a moment -- correct me if you think I'm wrong.

GLENN: And planned. Planned.

STU: Do you think it was planned?

GLENN: Absolutely.

STU: Number one, he does it in front of cameras. He's saying basically, there's a massive cost overrun by the guy he's standing next to, in front of cameras. Which would be an embarrassing moment for this guy in theory.

Then he also has a letter in his jacket to pull out, when he says, no. That's not happening.

He pulls that out.

GLENN: He knows that's coming.

STU: Now, look, the building was finished five years ago.

GLENN: Yeah. But what his point was. You're right.

You're right.

His point was, this is part of your renovation.

STU: Right. That's not true.

It's not a new cost overrun. The way he's presenting it. But he's doing that intentionally.

Because it's old-school power dynamics, right? Because this seems to be something that Trump thinks about a lot for a lot of different reasons.

GLENN: You think?

STU: Well.

GLENN: So let me show you what he did. What he's doing here is the same. What has he been saying about Powell?

STU: He's been saying, he needs to --

GLENN: Resign.

STU: He's dumb. He needs to resign.

GLENN: He's dumb.

STU: He's saying he's dumb. He's a dumb person in the Fed. He's not lowering interest rates.

GLENN: That tactic. The best example of that tactic is Little Rocket Man. Look at Little Rocket Man.

Yeah. Well, Little Rocket Man. Maybe I will just have to wipe him off the face of the earth.

And then what does he do?

He goes where no president has ever gone before to Little Rocket Man's space.

And sucks all the oxygen out of that room. Okay?

And stands -- this giant, standing next to little rocket man. Did you notice, how big Trump looked next to little Powell?

I mean, it was almost the same power dynamic. Okay?

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And Powell knows. Powell knows. He's -- Trump, I think is older than Powell.
And look at how young Trump looks next to Powell.

STU: He does look younger.

GLENN: So he's been saying, little rocket man. Little rocket man. Little rocket man.

He then goes to the place where little rocket man is. In this case, the Federal Reserve.

And then what happens?

What is he saying today?

You know, I -- I'm not going to fire Powell. Because I think he will do the right went.

I mean, we had a really nice meeting.

And, you know, while those cost overruns are important. I think he's got it under control.

I don't know if there's a reason to investigate.

STU: It gives him an out, basically.

GLENN: Gives him a complete out.

He has hit him hard, then he meets with him and hits him hard again in front of the press.

I can guarantee you, they had a delightful conversation behind.

And he's now -- we're now in that place, where it's lather, rinse, repeat. You don't repeat, if everything is -- your hair is clean. Right?

You don't have to do it a second time, if everything is fine.

So he'll do that. Lather, rinse. Am I going to repeat?

Do I have to repeat?

Because I'll repeat. We'll go back to lather. I just rinsed. I lathered up. Yesterday, we rinsed.

Are you -- are you clean enough now? Or do you need to repeat this cycle?

That's exactly what he's doing.

STU: And he's kind of giving him the message that, I'll make your life a living hell --

GLENN: And he's doing it in Powell's space.

There's something about doing it in someone else's space. Shows, you do not have fear.

STU: But he works on both sides of that, right? Because he does sometimes go into their space and do this type of thing.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But also -- and this is -- because when I was watching this interaction. It reminded me of something you were talking about when you were in the White House.

Of the way he's designing the White House.

He's thinking about these old school power dynamics. Constantly, when he's designing what the White House is like.

GLENN: So he is -- because this really bothers me.

Because America is. We don't have palaces for our president.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Okay?

And he's putting gold everywhere.

And I didn't say to him, that, you know,, hey.

The gold thing.

You know, maybe you should cool your jets on that.

He brought it up to me. And he said, do you -- look at the gold.

I mean, this is beautiful. And this is like -- 24 karat gold.

Is that the most -- is that the best? 24 karat.

I can't remember, but it's the most expensive kind of gold. Okay? It's not like spray paint gold.

It's actual gold leaf. Really, really expensive. And he's paying for all of it.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: And he said, you like this.

I will go leaf -- basically, I will go -- I am thinking about gold leafing Melania soon. And I'm sitting there, and I'm thinking, this is not -- this is not a palace.

And he almost sensed this, I think from me.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: He said, you know, I know we don't have a palace, but everybody from foreign countries that comes in, they are around palaces.

They see power a certain way. And he said, so I want to make sure when they're sitting in here, they understand, this is the most powerful room in the world, in every language that they might speak.

STU: Hmm. Hmm.

GLENN: Okay? So he's doing all this to -- as a way to intimidate again.

And if you look at it.

You would think, United States is broke.

I can't believe they're leaving.

No. They're not.

He is!

So he's not only saying, this is the most powerful office.

But I'm putting gold all over it. Because I'm wealthy. And powerful.

Because I, unlike maybe you, Macron.

I wasn't in politics.

I went out and actually built giant buildings in the biggest city in the world.

Okay?

So he's, again, exercising a power dynamic.

And when you watch him, in those meetings, where, notice he has press conferences with these guys.

How do we usually announce big things with countries?

When their Prime Minister or their president comes over.

STU: We put them up as equals.

They each get one question. You know --

GLENN: Right. Back and forth.

STU: Yeah. Some --

GLENN: You get -- you get the president on one side of the room.

And the foreign president or leader on the other side of the room.

Back and forth. And they're equal.

And the flags are there.

Not with President Trump.

Very few are getting that.

They're all sitting down in his office. In that intimidating space.

And a gaggle comes in. And he says, hey. I want to introduce you. Here's the president of the Philippines. We're doing some great stuff.

We have this great deal. Blah, blah. And maybe the president of the Philippines will get one question.

Maybe. Maybe. So are you really the president of the Philippines?

STU: Is that really a country still?

GLENN: I didn't know that. So maybe he'll get one question.

But then that guy has to sit there uncomfortably, while the president is answering questions about the world, about the country.

STU: Elon Musk. Or whatever else is going on in his life.

GLENN: He has nothing to say, so he sits there as a secondary. That if we know is a negotiation tactic.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Donald Trump people tonight think he thinks about this stuff.

They don't think he's a deep thinker.

Maybe because of his language. But I think his language is also a choice.

His language is a choice. One, I know he can -- I know he can -- I know he understands big words.

But he speaks the language of the common man, for a couple of reasons.

One, I believe that was the language he learned in construction with his father.

Because he had to start working at the bottom. You want to build a hotel, son?

Great. Then you need to know how the air-conditioning handlers work.

In fact, you will go down and work side by side, and you will help build them.

So he grew up in the business world, talking to those guys. That's why those guys love him. Because he speaks their language.

Also, have you noticed, Donald Trump has started to let the F bombs fly? Now, why would he do that? Why would he do that?

Did you see what Joe Rogan was just saying about Hunter Biden?

He was just saying, you know, the guy -- he doesn't care. He just uses the F bombs like everybody else does.

And that was endearing to Rogan and also the Atlantic.

That, you know, he just -- he doesn't care.

He just is who he is.

Well, Donald Trump is showing you a little bit more, who he is.

Where he wasn't, in 2016, 2017. 2018. 2019.

Now, he's speaking the language, because I believe our culture.

Not in a way I would like. But our culture is changing.

And he is adapting to it, as well.

The guy is brilliant.

I wish I could spend a month with him. Because I think I could write a book about Donald Trump. And how he thinks.

Just spending a day with him, a few weeks ago.

And hearing how he spoke about every piece of art in the White House.

He selected every piece of art, and where it should go.

And it was to clarify who he is, and what he wants to accomplish, remind him what his job is.

So all the way from his bedroom, all the way down to the oval.

The -- the art on the wall, is to remind him of who he is. And what he's doing.

If you're on a tour, you come in. And you see, Donald Trump on one wall. And he selected Barack Obama for the other wall.

George Bush doesn't even have a painting in a bathroom. He put Barack Obama there as a symbol of, we're a country that is split. But this house brings us all together.

Would anyone ever give him credit for thinking that way?

He's thinking about what the message is on the tour.

He's really brilliant. And I think that's why things are changed so rapidly.

Is because he's using -- he knows how it works now.

He knows the game he's playing.

He's learned it.

He's mastered it.

And now he's just executing one after another.

Check, check, check, check.

And look at the results in six months.

This weekend is officially six months in.

He's accomplished more than I think any other president, has accomplished, in maybe their full term. In six months.

Now, I would like to see it codified.

But if -- if he had a Senate and a House, that were actually doing the business of the people.

It would be codified.