RADIOAugust 02, 2022

5 war possibilities for China, Taiwan, & U.S. involvement

China seems to be on the offensive, thanks to Nancy Pelosi’s pre-announced trip to Taiwan. Glenn and Jason Buttrill, chief researcher for The Glenn Beck Program, war-game five possible scenarios between the two Asian nations. They discuss whether or not the U.S. is ‘obligated’ to back Taiwan, and what America’s foreign policy strategy has been regarding this conflict for decades. Either way, Glenn says, the world continues to destabilize and NOW is the time to pray for our country.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I'm 18 years old. I'm working at WPGC in Washington, DC. And I can see the light on top of the Washington monument. So I'm at ground zero. Ronald Reagan is in office. And there's something -- I don't remember what it was. But a confrontation with the Soviet Union. And it was really serious. And I remember keeping the door to the teletype in my studio open. Teletype is how we used to get the news. And it had bells on it. And a ten-bell event would be nuclear war. And I kept that propped open, so I could hear those bells and count the bells. And we got as high as I think six bells. And I would count them. Because I knew. And I thought, I'm at ground zero. This could be over in ten minutes. I haven't felt that way, really until this administration. You know, even after September 11th, I remember feeling on September 11th. Boy, I don't know what they're going to do. But it wasn't a fear of nuclear war or all out war, over the whole world. We're approaching that kind of -- of place. We now have -- do we have the live footage? This is -- they're tracking Nancy Pelosi's plane. We can show it to you. She's at about 10,000 feet. Headed towards Taiwan. She has avoided the restricted airspace over the South China Sea. However, China has just closed the airspace above the Taiwan strait. And they are -- they're at least flexing their muscles. If you look at what China is sending out, online. You are seeing military being moved. You have the aircraft carriers from China, moving out of their home ports. And headed towards Taiwan. I don't know what's going to happen. We have a guy who actually is, I mean, somewhat of kind of an expert on this area. Working for us. He's our chief researcher. And head writer for the Glenn Beck Program. Jason Buttrill. Hello, Jason. How are you?

JASON: Hey, Glenn. Doing good.

GLENN: So, Jason, help me out on -- how serious is this, with China, do you think?

JASON: I think it's very serious. Especially considering the symbolic meaning of Taiwan. Taiwan is very, very symbolic to the Chinese/Communist Party. This has been an issue since, you know, the communists took over, really. So this is probably one of the most crazy, ambiguous treaties we've ever had. The Taiwan relations act. The most ambiguous thing ever. Which makes Kirby's remarks yesterday, kind of odd to come out and say, we don't support independents so publicly. I mean, I've read the Taiwan relations act, cover to cover. The ambiguity. Just saying it's ambiguous is even an understatement. It's the equivalent of one of the most confusing Christopher Nolan movies. Take Inception. Take Interstellar. Take Tenants. And then have 30 different people try to describe what it actually means. I actually think it -- that's basically what we're talking about here.

GLENN: So this is -- Taiwan and China are at war with each other. It's a civil war. And it happened in the 1950s. So this has been going back and forth from the 1950s. But it is -- it's coming to a head, and that's because as China rises in power, they think the odds are that they can take the United States of America. I don't think that's possible yet. But I think we're maybe five years. Two to five years away from they believe actually being able to take Taiwan. And call our bluff. Or just fight the war. You think that's accurate?

JASON: No. Absolutely. China sees Taiwan like they see Hong Kong. When they made the deal with Hong Kong. They say, oh, China has no right to do this. It is supposed to be two systems in one country. Yeah, but it was in that agreement, that China would one day take control, and it would be one system. People usually leave that part out. They just decided to accelerate their plans. They see Taiwan as one China. And they believe it's rightfully theirs. And their plan is to always take it. They just don't have the military capabilities. Now, moving towards what we're seeing now. The thing that would always tip us off. And the in Taiwan relations act. We said, if you try to coerce militarily, to try to change Taiwan and take it. We will respond. And President Reagan, I believe in 1980, and 1982. Reassured after the 1972 Taiwan act. Reassured, hey. We're still giving you weapons. We're still coming to your definition. So this is a very, very old agreement that they had. And, yes, we will go and respond. But the thing that's always kept the things kind of open. And that we can see what's going on in the future. Is that it would take a tremendous Chinese military buildup, to be put in place, before we would -- the actual action. We would see it, the buildup. We would go and respond to it. What Pelosi has done. And let's put this into context. The Speaker of the House has just undermined her presidents -- in the same party. His foreign the policy. She's taken it on herself, to manipulate foreign policy. It's absolutely unprecedented. She has no right to do this. It's not under the duties of the Speaker of the House. But her actions are allowing this military buildup to happen. It's accelerating an already accelerated plan, that we've seen with China and Hong Kong.

GLENN: I tell you, it is truly frightening. And, by the way, the reason why Taiwan is important to the United States. Is if Taiwan falls, we then are pretty much out of Asia. The next country to fall would be New Zealand and Australia. And China would just overrun all of that hemisphere. And between Russia and China -- you know, that would be a very difficult match for us to even stand shoulder to shoulder with. Okay. So let me give you a couple of scenarios. And I want to hear what you think are the best scenarios. These are five different scenarios that have been put together by a Taiwanese based researcher. So the first one, minimalist approach. The people's army occupies Jemen or Matsu (phonetic) islands, as well as Taiwan's islands in the South China Sea. Maybe even the (inaudible) islands. They declare part or all of the Taiwan Strait, a no-go zone. They just did that. And they -- give it a no-go zone to all military shipping. This would be fairly easy, et cetera, et cetera. And it would not overcommit them. It would just be a step up. Scenario number two. Hybrid warfare. Some sort of partial naval and aerial blockade of Taiwan, intended to interfere with the economy.

Combined with stepped up harassments, such as direct flyovers, which they did last night while we were all sleeping. Incursions into maritime space, by China's military. They might also have cyber attacks, which they just did, about two hours before Pelosi's plane was taking off. Scenario number three. A serious attack, but no invasion. This would involve air and sea warfare. No boots on the ground. Full airline and Naval blockade. Protracted set of naval and aerial battles, designed to degrade Taiwan's military, combined with ballistic missile attacks on military targets. Scenario number four. A real, actual invasion. Scenario number five. Short of a nuclear attack, would be the worst case. Full air and sea blockade. Massive ballistic missile attacks on military targets. Cyber attack. Aggressive naval and ariel attacks. And boots on the ground. I don't think that one is even possible right now. But maybe it is. Which one -- or do you have another scenario that you think is more likely to come from this?

JASON: So to point out, I think every single one of those scenarios, would break the Taiwan Relations Act, which would require an American response. So if they're thinking about doing any of those, they're ready for war. Just really quick, if I could remember all of them. The first one, occupying some of those islands in the Air Defense Zone. We already -- occupying any of those islands, including the Pengu Islands. Those are part of the Peskador (phonetic) Islands, which is specifically named, in the Taiwan Relations Act, as part of Taiwan. So that's a huge -- that's a huge, you know -- we're getting involved, basically. If they do that.

GLENN: That is -- or that is a progressive way for China to do it. Where they're not taking all of it. They're just moving in. And then like Republicans always do. You just back up. Okay. Well, that's okay. Okay. Well, we'll get it on the next boat. That's a progressive tactic. And America would probably not go to war, over something like that. I would hope.

STU: Yeah. We should point out real quick, Nancy Pelosi has just landed in Taiwan. So that's -- just watched it live here. As it -- so whatever game is being played, is going to be played.

GLENN: So bizarre.

JASON: The other scenarios pretty much -- many of them involved economic hybrid warfare, or blockades. Economic hybrid warfare was not mentioned back then in the Taiwan relations act. I would put that in the same category as blockade. That's also mentioned. So if any of those things happen, we are then, according to the texts, obligated to respond. So we're responding anyway.

GLENN: If they pretty much do anything. Even the lightest, most minimal approach, they would be in violation of this act. Our treaty, if you will. And it puts us, you know, into action. And calls our bluff.

I am terrified what the Biden administration would do. Because the Biden administration is absolutely toothless. We have no allies. What we've done in Russia has only benefited Russia and hurt everyone else. I think these guys could overreact. And do something very provocative, that in the end, will just destroy us. What should be our response, Jason.

JASON: Oh, gosh. Likable I said, this is such a complicated issue. It's so -- I hate to use the word again, ambiguous. Let me just go to this point. I think that -- I don't think China will do any of those things. I think China will use this as an excuse to do a massive military buildup. That's what I think. And we already saw --

GLENN: Massive military exercise.

JASON: Massive military exercise. Oh, we're just going to position all these things here. We're going to put all these boats here. We're going to keep these aircraft carriers over here. That way, it puts us off balance on, we don't know how far we've escalated their time line. That's why I think, this is such a horrible -- not only dangerous, but horrible move by Nancy Pelosi in doing this. Is you -- you're bringing right to the surface, what we think we have ten years to plan for. Or prepare for. That's what I think will happen. I think we'll see a lot more military buildup in that area. It will be hard to know when they actually attack. Now, if they do any of those things. I think they're obligated to respond in some way. I'll leave it up to them. To decide, what is -- how to balance it all out. They're obviously not the ones right now, in charge to do that. But what -- we're signaling to everyone else in the region, that, hey, the time of you being able to count us. That's over now. So, yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: I will tell you, Jason, thank you so much for your analysis and, of course, we'll be watching it. And if you -- if you watch and see some things, let me know and tweet it out today. And Facebook post. Because this is something that is ongoing. Thank you, Jason. For your help. I will tell you, that now is the time to pray for your country. And let me just remind you. The Republicans always get the warmonger label. Let's just say that the Republicans have changing on war. We've learned our lessons, I think. And Donald Trump, the world was at peace. Look at how fast that has deteriorated. We could be at -- in a proxy war, with both Russia and China. By tomorrow! It's insanity.

Why RFK Jr.’s Former Running Mate OPPOSES Casey Means for Surgeon General

President Trump’s nomination of Dr. Casey Means for Surgeon General had many MAHA fans cheering. But RFK Jr.’s former running mate, BlazeTV host Nicole Shanahan, has major reservations. She joins Glenn, who has been a fan of Casey, to explain why she believes there are stronger candidates. Means, Shanahan claims, may have “conflicts of interest” because of the “biometric harvesting company” she founded and its close ties to Silicon Valley. Shanahan also questions whether RFK Jr. is playing “political 4D chess,” or if she was lied to when she was promised that the Means siblings wouldn’t be in government. Is RFK Jr. reporting to someone other than Trump? Shanahan explains why she believes it’s possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Nicole Shanahan. Nicole, how are you?

NICOLE: Glenn, how are you doing?

GLENN: I am very good. It's great to have you here.

So I want to ask you, the Surgeon General thing, are you for Casey Means? Or not for Casey Means?

NICOLE: Well, I will tell you who I am for, Glenn.

GLENN: Okay.

NICOLE: I'm for all of those Americans. Those hundreds of thousands of doctors, seeking truth, honesty, and dignity in our medical system once again. That is what I'm for. That is what propels MAHA into existence.

That's what propels Bobby Kennedy into the position of running for president of the United States. That's why I joined the campaign. It really is about listening to this group of doctors that did the right thing during the COVID pandemic.

That spoke up, when it was dangerous to speak up.

That lost their licenses. And so when I hear from that base, concern or research. About individuals, in and around MAHA.

I have to listen to them.

And I do listen to them.

Because oftentimes, they are right. They're brave, and they're principled. So the concern I've been hearing from that group of people is that MAHA -- you know, any movement. MAGA had this issue too of infiltration by different groups that are more self-serving, than they are for the movement itself.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

NICOLE: And so just one example, Casey Means is a founder of a company that does biometric harvesting. She's very close with many of the big data biometric harvesting companies.

In Silicon Valley. And this -- I noticed with all these people. You do not want them running in a government position that is responsible for everybody equally. Right?

GLENN: So wait. Wait. Wait.

What is -- what is that?

They're harvesting, what?

NICOLE: Well, so biometric data is anything between heart rate data, to all of the data that is collected from your FitBit or high glucose monitor. It could be labs. It could be -- then there's all the DNA harvesting. And big data that's being done.

So, you know, I think that the base -- MAHA really came from medical freedom. And medical sovereignty.

And the idea that we have to keep conflicts of interests. Out of the government.

And so when I -- you know, see some stuff going on. That we could be doing better.

Right?

Our job.

And I learned this from the MAGA base.

Our job is to ton seek the best possible people. For government, that are truly putting the principles of this country first.

The principles of American sovereignty first.

GLENN: So you wrote yesterday.

It's very strange. It doesn't make any sense. I was promised that if I supported RFK Jr. in the Senate confirmation, that neither of these siblings would be working under HHS or an appointment.

And that people much more qualified would be. I don't know -- I'm sorry.

RFK very clearly lied to me. Or what's going on. It's been clear in recent conversations that he's reporting to someone regularly, who is controlling his decisions, and it isn't President Trump.

With regards to the siblings, there is something very artificial and aggressive about them. Almost as if they were bred and raised as Manchurian assets. Wow!

NICOLE: So keep in mind, I was responding to Dr. Suzanne Humphries.

Who was also expressing very similar sentiment.

GLENN: Concern. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

NICOLE: Concern. There's better candidates.

So what's going on? I also heard from other MDs in the field.

That there was another doctor that RFK had wanted for the position. Very, very qualified doctor.

And -- and, you know, he was caught by surprise as well. By -- by this other choice.

So, you know, there's -- again, they -- they don't call it the swamp for no reason. Right?

GLENN: Right.

NICOLE: And, you know, I'm not officially within the administration at all.

In fact, I decided to take the path of staying an independent --

GLENN: Smart.

NICOLE: -- media person. Which I think -- I think and you know this, Glenn. It's really important that when you are an independent media voice, that you -- you stick by your principles. And that you are not just a mouthpiece for any government organizations.

That you're really on the outside, reflecting back the hopes and wishes of the constituents.

GLENN: Yeah. There's -- it's very hard to do.

I mean, I take stances against the president.

And for the president. You always have to -- you always have to balance, you know, I have my opinion.

And I'm never going to be bought out by anybody.

I'm never. But you also want to make sure that you're being fair to the people that you trust. And I know you have trusted RFK for a very, very long time.

And for what struck me on this. Is, you know, I don't know if RFK lied to me. Which I hope he didn't, or what's going on. It's been clear in recent conversation that he is reporting to someone regularly, who is controlling his decisions.

That's a remarkable thing to say, especially about RFK.

Because he does not strike me as somebody who is afraid of somebody else.

NICOLE: You know, I don't know if it's fear or that he's playing political 4D chess. And, again, they don't call it the swamp for no reason.

It's just, at some point, there's certain decisions, that are worth fighting for.

And I do appreciate what a very complex political environment this is.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

NICOLE: And I do understand that even within these agencies, there are groups that are intentionally keeping and withholding information from the new leadership.

So, you know, I -- I fully appreciate how complicated it is.

So I fully appreciate how complicated it all is, but there are definitely things that the base is -- is, you know, like, this is an easy one. This could have gone better. Right?

You don't truly -- and, you know, everyone is guessing what precisely this 4D chess is all about. And why these moves are being made. And trying to anticipate the next one.

But it's something that I think that, you know, there's just certain things that indicate that whomever he's giving -- whoever his chess coach is. Could be making some better decisions for him. And --

GLENN: But Casey.

I mean, when I talk to the twins, during -- or after COVID.

They seemed pretty clear on what was bad and what was good.

They -- they both seemed to be good on -- on COVID. And the vaccines. Didn't they?

Or is my memory --

JEFFY: They talk a great talk.

I will say, I was once a fan of it as well.

It was only after I received many comments from individuals, in and around the transition team.

As well as new research that came up.

And then really, like, you know, when the base expresses these things and provides that degree of inquiry, and it shows that kind of concern.

I think we owe it to them.

GLENN: Yes. I agree. I agree.

ANNA: Yeah.

GLENN: So overall, how do you feel things are going?

NICOLE: I think, again, there's been a lot of focus around food dives. Meanwhile, there's millions of people suffering from vaccine injuries, that still feel very neglected.

So I do think -- I do appreciate the executive order, regarding gain of function and limiting overseas research.

GLENN: And shutting down a dangerous -- and shutting down a very dangerous bio lab here.

NICOLE: Yes. And there are many of these bio labs that are kind of flying under the radar.

GLENN: Right.

NICOLE: So it's a big step in the right decisions sedition. I'm a huge Jay Bhattacharya fan. Probably one of his biggest.

I really am excited for him, as he built out his team.

I hope, he has a very, very strong team around him. In the next coming weeks. Because he's going need to it.

As far as HHS goes, you know, I would love to see Bobby bring in more of those doctors that have been around him for the last ten years, very regularly.

Because these are the individuals that, you know, I -- I trust these people with my life. They have sacrificed everything to do the right thing time and time again.

They are so deeply principled. They will never take a check over helping a patient out.

And they actually do have the answers. So I'm hoping to see more of those people around Bobby too.

GLENN: So I'm wondering because this is the way I feel about a couple of things with the FBI. And Intel.

That if I don't see some people in the next year or so, go to jail, or at least brought in for a fair and honest trial, you know. I don't want to just scoop people up. And just assume that they're guilty.

But build a good, strong case. Bring it to trial.

Have it a fair and honest trial. And let the chips fall where they may.

But if I don't see some prosecution, at least. I think I'm very upset at the G O.J.

Pam Bondi. Head of the FBI. Kash Patel. And I don't -- and I'm trusting them so far, that they are doing that.

Do you feel the same way at all, about -- you know, if you don't see some people who go to jail there, that clearly lied about the vaccines.

If they don't go to jail. You have -- you really haven't fixed anything.

You're just eating around the edges.

NICOLE: Yeah. Yeah. I think that really explains it. And this is why I think it's important to continue to voice those concerns, because they're only going to grow and mount.

And it really is the American people, that were sold this vision of accountability.

And as we want to see it. We have to see it. Anywhere. Several months into the administration now.

HHS, you know, lags behind the Oval Office in terms of getting going.

But they're -- people were seriously injured. There were many crimes committed against the American public.

Crimes committed against our bravest doctors. Crimes committed against children.

We need accountability.

We really, really need to see that.

Because, you know, there's -- there's a preciousness in this moment. We have to -- we have to deliver. This country deserves it.

GLENN: And, I mean, if we're -- if we can't correct the things that, for instance. Washington State. Just passed a law where if there is another pandemic, everybody seems to be, you know, claiming there's another one, right around the corner.

But if there is another pandemic, that they will have absolute control, over what you put into your body. And what you do. That's terrifying.

NICOLE: I do.

And those emergency orders, they will scrutinize them. They have revisions.

GLENN: Washington State just revised it to just codify it. Washington State just codified it. It's crazy.

NICOLE: Yeah. Yeah.

So I would like to see more focus around that, not Red Dye 40 and not Kellogg's.

I'm totally fine leaving Kellogg's alone, in favor of HHS spending. All of its energy. And all of its focus. And all of its leverage, making sure that we are actually properly ready for the next pandemic.

And not to cause the catastrophic harm, that was caused during COVID-19.

GLENN: Nicole Shanahan. She's got the podcast Back To the People. And it's now coming to Blaze Media.

It's the same podcast she's been doing. Now as she says, with a wider reach. Glad to have you.

Nicole, thank you very much.

NICOLE: Thanks, it's a pleasure to come on.

GLENN: We'll talk to you again.

Is America’s Grid a Ticking Time Bomb? Trump’s Energy Secretary REACTS | Glenn TV | Ep 430

President Trump is working hard to right the wrongs of the Biden administration. But did Biden harm our energy grid even more than we thought? While Glenn was on vacation in Italy, two other European countries — Spain and Portugal — suffered one of the biggest blackouts in their history. The mainstream media, as they always do, rushed to blame it on ANYTHING other than the countries’ heavy reliance on unreliable green energy. But Glenn has the receipts and the evidence that leftists tried to make America’s grid just as unreliable. Glenn speaks with Energy Secretary Chris Wright about how the Trump administration is reversing these dangerous policies. Secretary Wright also discusses his department’s discovery that Biden shoveled out $93 BILLION in energy loans after Kamala Harris lost the 2024 election and before Trump could take office. Plus, he comments on Trump’s plans to deal with OPEC, why Trump must refill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and why Trump is planning the biggest energy project in American history to help accommodate AI. But first, Glenn recaps the biggest media lies that he missed while on vacation. Topping the list: Are these elitists like Axios and Jen Psaki finally admitting that they lied about Biden’s cognitive decline, or do they STILL not get that their charade is over?

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Is the New American Pope Catholic? | Bishop Strickland | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 256

A new pope has been chosen! As the recording of this episode of "The Glenn Beck Podcast" began, white smoke emerged from the Sistine Chapel, signaling the selection of the first American pope. Glenn and Bishop Joseph Strickland react live to the news as the whole world wonders if Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, now Pope Leo XIV, will continue in the ways of his predecessor Pope Francis or go a more traditional route. Bishop Strickland, who was removed from office by Pope Francis, says the former pope pushed a church “in the world and of the world” and reviews “duplicity,” “corruption,” and potential abuse overlooked by the Vatican, including the infamous McCarrick scandal. The pair discuss the resurgence of the Latin Mass, globalism, the Catholic Church’s approach to homosexuality and gender identity, and whether the Shroud of Turin is an “icon” or a “relic.” As the new pope greets the world, Glenn asks, “If we have a more progressive pope, does that set the Church back?” Bishop Strickland advises that “even if we are disappointed and dismayed,” we must pray and keep our focus on God.

Zuckerberg Wants to Give You AI “Friends” … To CONTROL You?

Meta and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg has a new goal: to give lonely Americans AI “friends.” But Glenn sounds the alarm: this must NEVER happen! Glenn explains the hidden danger in Zuckerberg’s seemingly kindhearted plan: “AI cannot, must not, and will never be your friend.” Opening that door will only give Meta insane levels of potential for manipulation and control over you.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let's start with this: Mark Zuckerberg. Good guy. I mean, he brought us Facebook.

And, you know, that is the thing that brought all of us together.

Brought out families together. All the people that we lost touch with.

Oh, the world is so much better now that we have Facebook.

So now, he's got another idea. Could we play the clip of Mark Zuckerberg?

VOICE: There's a stat that I honestly think is crazy. The average American has I think it's fewer than three friends. Three people they consider friends. And the average person has demand for meaningfully more. I think it's 15 friends or something.

I guess there's probably at some point, I'm too busy. I can't deal with more people. But the average person wants more connectivity, connection than they have. So, you know, there's a lot of questions that people ask.

Of stuff like, okay. Is this going to replace kind of in person connections or real life connections?

And my default is that the answer to that is probably no.

I think it -- it -- I think that there are all these things that are better kind of about physical connections, when you can have them.

But the reality is that people just don't have the connection when they feel more alone, a lot of the time, than they would like.

GLENN: Hmm. True.

Now, let me ask you. Is there a time when you don't remember feeling so isolated? When you didn't really feel like I don't have any real friends?

When you didn't -- you had real connections with people, instead of a million connections with people that are your friends, but not really your friends?

Can you think of a time, way back in history?

I mean, probably have to go back to the cavemen, to find a time.

Oh. Before Facebook, and social media!

When we weren't all killing ourself, because we have no meaning.

Now, from the people who brought you kill yourself, because you've been on Facebook too much.

Brings you new AI friends. Oh, this is going to be good.

By the way, you know, that's a crazy stat, I think the average American has, what? Three friends. And they have a capacity for, I don't know. Fifteen or 20. I don't know.

Really think about it right now.

How many true friends, do you have?

How many true friends?

People that when you are down and out, there is nothing -- the whole world is against you!

That that person will actually stand by your side. And go, yeah.

I'm their friend.

And I don't care what you say.

How many? How many do you have?

I think I would count myself lucky if I have three.

Now, I have a lot of consequences.

I have a lot of people who we all think are friends. But as a recovering alcoholic, I've been there.

I've done that. As a recovering alcoholic,
who then also is a conservative and spoke out about the Obama administration, I know who my friends are.
I know who my friends are not.

And I think there's a lot of people that have counterfeit friends.

If you've got. Oh, I've got ten or 15 friends.

Eh.

No, you don't. No, you don't.

I've always grown up thinking, you're lucky, you're lucky, to have three, five, really good friends.

That will walk through anything with you. Do you agree with that, Stu?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: You've never been there.

STU: For you? Oh, God no. But I'm just saying, generally speaking. No. I think -- I mean, you're describing a great friend. You're describing a really --

GLENN: A real friend.

STU: Yeah. Like someone you know and stick around for multiple decades.

GLENN: Yeah, I have lots of friends. You know what I mean? I have millions of Facebook friends.

STU: Right. Those aren't real.

GLENN: Right. And I have lots of friends. But the ones that are there for you always, no matter what, I have family.

And I have family.

STU: Right.

GLENN: And I have a handful of friends. I would consider you one of those.

STU: Thank you. I would as well.

GLENN: Why?

Remember, I have a drinking problem.

STU: Yeah. A lot of brain cells killed to make that decision.

But I think that you -- yes. I think the only thing that I think I'm drilling down a little bit on to try to understand. When you say, well, I have a lot of friends.

In a way, I think that's what Zuckerberg is talking about.

It's not even necessarily a great friend that you have for multiple decades. And can count on at any time.

Just the mid-level consequences, are drying up for a lot of people.

GLENN: Yeah. And why is that?

Why is that?

Because we don't talk to each other anymore.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Because of social media.

You know, when this generation says, I don't know.

I just think it's weird. I'm just now in a bar someplace.

And some stranger comes up to me and wants to strike up a conversation. I'm like, hello, weirdo. I don't know!

You think it's less weird to go online?
When people can fake everything!

Thank you, Mark Zuckerberg.

But no thanks. Okay.

STU: And they're just -- to build up on this point for one second.

There's a study that came out, the last 20 years, of how much time do you spend socializing with the people.

Again, that's not with your best friends.

This is just socializing with anyone, a human.

Every single group. Every single group has massive drops.

GLENN: Massive.

STU: Massive drops. Just give you some examples.

Ages. Fifteen to 24-year-olds. Thirty-five-point down.

In 20 years. 35 percent. So a typical 15-year-old, as compared to what they are, in 2003 and 2025, where were the two measurement years?

They're spending 35 percent less time, with other human beings.

GLENN: Okay. Hang on just a second. Can you please stop distracting me? Because I'm trying to figure out why our kids are killing themselves.

STU: No, it's really hard.

GLENN: It's very hard to figure out.

STU: To understand.

And this is the coup de grâce of this entire study, which is, the typical female pet owner spends more time actively engaged with her pet, than she spends face-to-face contact with her friends of her own species.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: That is unbelievable -- not like you're in the same house as your cat.

Right? No. More face-to-face time with your cat!

GLENN: And I've got news for you. If you think your cat is your friend, wait until you die, and your cat is trapped in the house with you and you have no friends to check. They will eat your face.

STU: They will still have a use for you.

GLENN: Yeah. They will have a use foy.

STU: Not the other way around.

GLENN: Okay. Here's why I'm bringing this up today.

This is a lie, that is going to be sold to you, like crazy. And it's going to be wrapped in a beautiful, shiny package. And it's going to have from Mark Zuckerberg and others like him, on the tag.

They want you to believe, that AI and bots can be your friends.