RADIO

Crisis LOOMS: Glenn Beck breaks down Jamie Dimon’s urgent plea to prepare

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon recently warned that crisis is coming soon, but this isn’t a new revelation. He’s just saying what elites have known for a while out loud. Glenn Beck breaks down Dimon’s warning and explains what Americans must do to prepare.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So let me -- let me start -- let me start with not what's trending, but let's talk about what really matters. What should be keeping you up at night. But maybe isn't. Because it's not on your feed, or at least not yet. As anti-Semitism is spreading its civilizational poison all over America, as Tom Homan yesterday warned of another 9/11-style attack on the homeland, as the Democrats strangely keep fighting for the rights of those who are literally spreading hate, violence, and death in our colleges and our streets. As Congress remains fast asleep, yet you're wide awake every night. Kept awake by your growing debt, and shrinking dollar. Let me share the latest from Jamie Dimon.

That nobody I have seen has shared with you yet.

It was a talk he gave at the Reagan National defense forum in California. Jamie Dimon was a CEO of JPMorgan Chase, one of the largest and most influential financial institutions on earth. He delivered a warning, and it wasn't about cutting interest rates. Not about inflammation curves, or crypto adoption or anything else.

I want you to hear what he said, about Bitcoin. Do we have that audio, please?

VOICE: I was saying we shouldn't be stockpiling Bitcoin. We should be stockpiling guns, tanks, planes, drones. You know, rare earths. We know we need to do it. It's not a mystery.

VOICE: Did you say stockpiling of Bitcoin?

VOICE: I said we shouldn't be stockpiling. Stockpiling. Bullets.

VOICE: Oh, we shouldn't. Okay.

VOICE: You have the military guys tell you, if there's a war in the South China Sea, we have missiles for seven days. Come on. We can't say that with a straight face and think that's okay.

GLENN: Did you notice what the reporter did? She was trying to do a gotcha. You're saying we should stock Bitcoin? Okay. All right. She missed the whole point. He's referencing the Pentagon data saying, we only have enough precision-guided missiles for seven days of sustained conflict. I don't know.

Does that sound like a problem for anybody?

Let that settle in, a week!

That's what stands between deterrence and desperation, if war would break out in the South China Sea. Seven days.

And remember when I shared with you yesterday, the drone bombing in Ukraine, or by Ukraine, that wiped out an estimated one-third of the Russian nuclear -- nuclear strategic air command.

One-third of Russia's nuclear strategic air command?

Ukraine! They did that. That's a country that's almost in third world status, no real military left. and certainly no missiles. They did it with drones.

Imagine what could be done here! With -- with open borders. And enemies like China and Iran.

Enemies all over the world. Now, I want you to understand, Jamie Dimon is not a guy that usually deals in hyperbole. He's not a man who chases the headlines. His words. And he knows this. Moves global markets. The good news on this one, nobody will pay attention to him. Because nobody is interested in telling you the truth on how dire the situation actually is. You know, his silence in most cases is his statement.

That's the way they work at those levels. So when he breaks that silence, and he does it this bluntly, you better believe it's calculated.

Now, most of his piers are still peddling ESG slide shows and block chain buzzwords. But Dimon stepped into the national stage and said, we need to get real. And we need to get ready.

And here's the thing: He's not talking to hedge funds or Pentagon press. He knows. Look at her response. Oh.

He's talking directly to you. You.

This isn't about rare earth or tanks. This is about a new era of scarcity. That's what you have to grasp from what Jamie Dimon was actually talking about.

He is saying there is a reckoning with reality, that most Americans and CEOs and everybody else are not prepared for.

Play cut two of this, please.

VOICE: You are going to see a crack in the bond market. Okay?

It is going to happen. And I tell this to my regulars in this room. I'm telling you, it is going to happen, and you're going to panic.

I'm not going to panic. We will be fine. We will probably make more money. And my friends will tell me -- we like crises because it's good for JP Morgan Chase. Not really. I didn't know it would be a crisis in six months or six years. And I'm hoping that we change both the trajectory of the debt and the ability to embark on markets. Yeah. It's coming.

This is part of all of the stuff we've talked about.

And unfortunately, maybe we need that to wake us up.

That's the unfortunate thing.

GLENN: Cut three, please.

VOICE: And all that, do you think people of rural cities. Do you think people of inner cities thought they were getting anything.

Do you think those people think the American government is fair and competent. And is in their best interest. Their schools don't work.

They're not getting the skills they need, just now.

So I have to acknowledge, I also have -- because, you know, Republicans generally don't like red tape. You know, I understand the devastation of it. Most Democrats they love it. They want more of it. They want to make it so confusing, you can't even make the rules. You get punished and fined everywhere. Celebrate our virtues. Freedom of speech. Freedom of religion. Freedom of enterprise.

Equal opportunity.

Family. God. Country. You know, and acknowledge the flaws that we have which are extraordinary. We did the black population for years. Don't denigrate the great things of this country. Those are two different things. Any time, you put a team on the field. The team is torn apart, the team will lose. That's Caiaphas right now. We're not a team. We don't collaborate. We don't talk much with each other.

We've got to fix our permitting, our regulations, our immigration, our taxation.

Which, I think they're on their way.

We have to fix our inner city schools. Our health care system.

GLENN: Okay. So let's unpack this for a second. His dismissal of Bitcoin, first of all, not a continuation of his long-standing skepticism.

If you listen to all of the stuff he's saying.

This is something much more urgent.

In a time of instability, Bitcoin becomes an abstraction.

It has no mass. It has no utility.

Now, I'm a Bitcoin guy. I believe in Bitcoin. But Bitcoin depends on electricity and the internet and a collective belief. Bullets. They don't care if you believe in bullets or not. Fuel? It doesn't matter if you believe in fuel or not. Food? These are not ideas. These are lifelines. Did you hear what he was saying? Bullets, fuel, food: Lifelines.

Now, don't get me wrong. He's not all of a sudden a patriotic prepper-in-chief. But what he is doing is giving voice to something that the elites all know, but usually whisper behind closed doors, and he's saying it out loud now.

The veneer, we learned this under 9/11. Remember how on 9/11, 9/12, 9/13, we realized, oh, my gosh, this thing could collapse in a heartbeat.

We all knew the veneer of civilization, the veneer of order is so thin. Even the largest company in the world is dangerously exposed.

The danger -- the largest economy in the world, ours, is exposed! I want you to look at the numbers here.

Eighty percent of our rare earth minerals come from China. Basically, everything from missile guidance to smart phones. Eighty percent of it comes from China. What happens if they want to shove that off? What happens if we get to go to war? What happens if we just don't have the fuel to run across the ocean? What happens to us?

Our military. Recruitment shortfalls time and time again. Outdated infrastructure.

I mean, how many trillions of dollars have we spent in the last 20 years on infrastructure projects?

Look at our airports! Look at our munitions stockpile!

It wouldn't last a long weekend, if trouble really happened. And cyber attacks. One single cyber attack could shut down the grid for weeks.

And what happens? See, here's the thing that you have to hear from JP Morgan. He's not saying, prepare out of paranoia. He's saying it out of pattern recognition. Pattern recognition. You need to get good at pattern recognition.

The world is no longer stable. And it hasn't been. I don't know if you've noticed this. For a while!

But most people. All your neighbors are too distracted to notice. Cakes and circuses. Dimon went on to blast the regulatory obsession, you know, in order to make life difficult.

Did you hear what he just said? Democrats, they love it. They want more of it. And they want to make it more confusing. So you can't even meet the rules. You'll get punished and fined afterward.

The last four years, we have lived on the assumption that convenience was safety. That digital meant durable. That markets -- that global markets meant good. But history doesn't move in a trait line. It turns.

It turns around sometimes. It bends. It recoils. And in that recoil, the essentials of survival never change. Shelter, energy, food, protection, human trust in one another.

That's the most important. We don't have it.

What his message was, was very clear. He cuts against every modern comfort we've built our life around. Here's a giant bank saying, you've built your life, we've built our life around things that are not real. He's not saying abandon innovation. He's saying, don't bet your future on intangibles.

So his solution is the same solution we've been talking about here on this program forever.

Celebrate our virtues. Celebrate our freedoms, our freedom of speech, our freedom of religion, our freedom of enterprise.

Equal opportunity. Family, God, and country.

Those are his words. And acknowledge the flaws of the country.

But don't denigrate the great things that this country has done.

They are two very different things!

And start talking to one another. So here's what I want you to consider.

What would you do if the lights went out?

Not for a storm. But because a server farm in Taiwan was hit.

What would you trade your Bitcoin for at the grocery store shelves, if they were empty?

What does wealth mean in a world where your phone does not work. And your bank is a blinking error message. What does that wealth mean?

This isn't about fear-mongering. This is about grow up, America. Maturity. We're long overdue for a serious conversation about self-reliance in this country.

Not the kind you buy in bulk from a website. The kind you live, through community, preparation, clarity, intelligence, critical thinking.

Yes. Have food and water, not because you're afraid. But because you're a responsible human being. Know your neighbors. Not because you're social.

But because you need each other if systems fail.

Understand your rights, because you -- not because you just want to use them. But because you know some day you may have to use them.

I want you to know, this whole message, from him, I believe, and definitely from me. Is not about war. It's not warning you about war or famine or anything else. It's warning you, wake up! Wake up!

Ignore what's happening today, at your own peril. We've spent far too many days and years now, worshiping the screen and the stock ticker and the illusion that problems can be innovated away. But history has a really brutal way of humbling people, and civilizations that trade resilience for comfort. This is a moment that demands discernment.

Are you living in a way that will actually allow I to survive real shocks, or are you like so many people? Including me on many things. Chained to the conveniences that will vanish overnight, if the world sneezes.

Jamie Dimon said it very clearly. Let me just say it again. Bullets over Bitcoin. Tangible over theoretical. Preparation over posturing. The man who runs the most powerful bank in the world, is not hoarding hashtags. He's stockpiling reality.

Shouldn't we all be doing that!

TV

EXPOSED: Tim Walz's shocking ties to radical Muslim cleric

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is directly connected in more ways than one to a radical Muslim cleric named Asad Zaman. Zaman's history and ties are despicable, and despite Walz's efforts to dismiss his connection to Zaman, the proof is undeniable. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to connect the dots on this relationship.

Watch the FULL Episode HERE: Glenn Beck Exposes TERRORIST SYMPATHIZERS Infiltrating the Democrat Party

RADIO

Is there a sinister GOP plan to SELL national parks?

Is Sen. Mike Lee pushing a sinister plan to sell our national parks and build “affordable housing” on them? Glenn Beck fact checks this claim and explains why Sen. Lee’s plan to sell 3 million acres of federal land is actually pro-freedom.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Now, let me give you a couple of things, from people I generally respect.

Chris Rufo, I really respect.

I'm totally against selling this land.

Nobody is going to build affordable housing deep in the Olympic Peninsula, which is one of the most beautiful places in the country.

I agree, it's in Washington State. It's on the coast. And it's a rain forest.

I want my kids hiking, fishing, and camping on those lands, not selling them off for some tax credit scam. This is a question I want to ask Mike Lee about.

That's really good. Matt Walsh chimes in, I'm very opposed to the plan. The biggest environmentalist in the country are and always have been, conservatives who like to hunt and fish.

We don't just call ourselves environmentalists, because the label has too much baggage.

And the practice always just means communist. Really, we are naturalists in the tradition of Teddy Roosevelt, and that's why most of us hate the idea of selling off federal lands to build affordable housing or whatever. I want to get to affordable housing here in a second.

Preserving nature is important. It's a shame we haven't -- that we've allowed conservation to become so left-wing coated. It never was historically.

No, and it still isn't.

You're right about one thing, Matt. We are the best conservatives. We actually live in these places. We use these places. We respect the animals. We respect the land. We know how the circle of life works. So I agree with you on that.

But affordable housing. Why do you say affordable housing or whatever?

Are you afraid those will be black people? I'm just playing devil's advocate? Are you just afraid of black people? You don't want any poor people in your neighborhood or your forest?

That's not what they mean by affordable housing.

And I know that's not what you mean either.

But what -- what we mean by affordable housing is, if you take a look at the percentage of land that is owned in some of these states. You can't live in a house, in some of these states, you know. Close to anything, for, you know, less than a million dollars. Because there's no land!

There's plenty of land all around.

Some of it. Let's just talk about Utah.

Some of it is like the surface of the moon!

But no. No. No.

Not going to hunt and fish on the surface of the moon. But we can't have you live anywhere.

I mean, you have to open up -- there is a balance between people and the planet. And I'm sorry. But when you're talked about one half of 1 percent, and we're not talking about Yellowstone.

You know, we're not. Benji Backer, the Daily Caller, he says, the United States is attempting to sell off three million acres of public land, that will be used for housing development through the addition of the spending bill.

This is a small provision to the big, beautiful bill that would put land in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado. Idaho. New Mexico. Oregon. Utah. Washington, and Wyoming at risk.

Without so much as a full and fair debate by members of both sides of the political aisle.

You know, I talked -- I'll talk to him about this.

The irony is, the edition of this provision by Republican-led Senate goes entirely against conservation legacy of a conservation. President Trump made a promise to revive this legacy.

Yada. Yada. Yada.

More about Teddy Roosevelt.

Then let me give you this one from Lomez. Is Mike Lee part of a sinister plan to sell off federal land?

This plan to sell off public lands is a terrible proposal that doesn't make any sense under our present circumstances and would be a colossal political blunder. But I'll try to be fair to base Mike Lee.

And at least have him explain where this is all coming from.

Okay. I will have him do that in about 30 minutes.

Let me give you just my perspective on this.

I'm from the West. I love the west.

I don't hike myself.

I think there's about 80 percent of the people who say, I just love to hike. And they don't love to hike. They never go outside.

I'm at least willing to admit. I don't like to hike. But I love the land. I live in a canyon now. That I would love to just preserve this whole canyon in my lifetime. I'm not going to rule from the grave. But in my lifetime, to protect this, so it remains unspoiled. Because it is beautiful!

But we're talking about selling 3 million acres of federal land. And it's becoming dangerous.

And it's a giveaway. Or a threat to nature.

But can we just look at the perspective here?

The federal government owned 640 million acres. That is nearly 28 percent of all land in America!

How much land do we have?

Well, that's about the size of France.

And Germany. Poland.

And the United Kingdom, combined!

They own and hold pristine land, that is more than the size of those countries combined!

And most of that is west of the Mississippi. Where the federal control smothers the states.

Okay?

Shuts down opportunity. Turns local citizens into tenets of the federal estate.

You can't afford any house because you don't have any land!

And, you know, the states can't afford to take care of this land. You know why the states can't afford it?

Because you can't charge taxes on 70 percent of your land!

Anyway, on, meanwhile, the folks east of the Mississippi, like Kentucky, Georgia. Pennsylvania.

You don't even realize, you know, how little of the land, you actually control.

Or how easy it is for the same policies, to come for you.

And those policies are real.

Look, I'm not talking about -- I'm disturbed by Chris Rufo saying, that it is the Olympic forest.

I mean, you're not going to live in the rain forest. I would like to hear the case on that.

But we're not talking about selling Yellowstone or paving over Yosemite or anything like that.

We're talking about less than one half of one percent of federal land. Land that is remote.
Hard to access. Or mismanaged. I live in the middle of a national forest.

So I'm surrounded on all sides by a national forest, and then BLM land around that. And then me. You know who the worst neighbor I have is?

The federal government.

The BLM land is so badly mismanaged. They don't care what's happening.

Yeah. I'm going to call my neighbor, in Washington, DC, to have them fix something.

It's not going to happen.

If something is wrong with that land, me and my neighbors, we end up, you know, fixing the land.

We end up doing it. Because the federal government sucks at it.

Okay.

So here's one -- less than one half of 1 percent.

Why is it hard to access that land?

Well, let me give you a story. Yellowstone.

Do you know that the American bison, we call it the buffalo.

But it's the American bison.

There are no true American bison, in any place, other than Yellowstone.

Did you know that?

Here's almost an endangered species.

It's the only true American bison, is in Yellowstone.

Ranchers, I would love to raise real American bison.

And I would protect them.

I would love to have them roaming on my land.

But you can't!

You can't.

Real bison, you can't.

Why? Because the federal government won't allow any of them to be bred.

In fact, when Yellowstone has too many bison on their land, you know what the federal government does?

Kills them. And buries them with a bulldozer. Instead of saying, hey. We have too many.

We will thin the herd.

We will put them on a truck. Here's some ranchers that will help repopulate the United States with bison. No, no, no. You can't do that.

Why? It's the federal government. Stop asking questions. Do you know what they've done to our bald eagles.

I have pictures of piles of bald eagles.

That they'll never show you.

They'll never show you.

You can't have a bald eagle feather!

It's against the law, to have a feather, from a bald eagle!

If it's flying, and a feather falls off, you can't pick it up. Because they're that sacred.

But I have pictures of piles of bald eagles, dead, from the windmills.

And nobody says a thing.

Okay.

But we're talking about lands.

States can't afford to manage it.

Okay. But how can the federal government?

Now, this is really important.

The federal government is, what? $30 trillion in debt or are we 45 trillion now, I'm not sure?

Our entitlement programs, all straight infrastructure, crumbling.

And yet, we're still clinging to millions of acres of land, that the federal government can't maintain. Yeah, they can.

Because they can always print money.

We can't print money in the state, so we can't afford it.

Hear me out. The BLM Forest Service, Park Service, billions of dollars behind in maintenance, roads, trails, fire brakes.

Everything is falling apart..

So what's the real plan here?

Well, the Biden administration was the first one that was really open about it, pushing for what was called 30 by 30.

They want 30 percent of all US land and water, under conservation by 2030.

But the real goal is 5050.

50 percent of the land, and the water, in the government's control by 2050.

Half of the country locked up under federal or elite approved protection.

Now, you think that's not going to affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze, cattle. Harvest, timber, just live free. You won't be able to go on those. It won't be conservatives, who stop you from hunting and fishing.

It will be the same radical environmental ideologues, who see the land, as sacred, over people!

I mean, unless it's in your backyard. Your truck. Or your dear stand, you know, then I guess you can't touch that land.

Here's something that no one is talking about, and it goes to the 2030.

The Treasury right now, and they started under Obama, and they're still doing it now.

Sorry, under Biden.

And they're doing it now. The Treasury is talking about putting federal land on the national ballot sheet. What does that mean?

Well, it will make our balance sheet so much better.

Because it looks like we have so much more wealth, and we will be able to print more money.

Uh-huh. What happens, you know. You put something sacred like that, on your balance sheet, and the piggy bank runs dry.

And all of the banks are like, okay.

Well, you can't pay anymore.

What happens in a default?

What happens, if there's catastrophic failure. You don't get to go fish on that land. Because that land becomes Chinese.

You think our creditors, foreign and domestic, won't come knocking?

What happens when federal land is no longer a national treasure, but a financial asset, that can be seized or sold or controlled by giant banks or foreign countries.

That land that you thought, you would always have access to, for your kids, for your hunting lodge, for your way of life.

That is really important!

But it might not be yours at all. Because you had full faith in the credit of the United States of America.

So what is the alternative?

RADIO

Supreme Court UPHOLDS Tennessee trans law, but should have done THIS

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor a Tennessee law that bans transgender surgeries for minors. But famed attorney Alan Dershowitz explains to Glenn why “it should have been unanimous.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Alan Dershowitz, how are you?

ALAN: I'm doing great, how about you?

GLENN: It has been a really confusing week. I'm losing friends, I think, because I stand with Israel's right to defend themselves. And I'm pointing out, that while I don't want a war, Iran is a really bad place.

And then I see, the Supreme Court comes out best interest there are three justices are like, I don't know. I think children, you know, can change their identity before we even let them drive or carry a gun. Or enlist in the military.

It's insane!

ALAN: It is insane. Especially since the radical left said that -- 17 and a half-year-old -- voluntary sex with their boyfriend. That would be sexist, that would be horrible.

But they can consent to have an abortion. They can consent to have radical surgery, that can't be reversed.

By the way, the decision is like six to two and a half. Elena Kagan, my former colleague at Harvard, didn't reach the merits of whether or not a state could actually ban these operations on a minor. She got involved in whether or not you need super, duper scrutiny, or just super scrutiny, a kind of, you know, a very technical thing.

But she didn't rule on whether under any kind of scrutiny, the state could do that. So definitely, two of them said that the state could do it, but not necessarily a third one.

GLENN: Okay.

Can you break this argument down? And why it should have been unanimous?

ALAN: Oh, it should be unanimous. There's no question.

States under the Constitution, have the authority to decide medical issues. States decide a whole range of medical issues. I remember when I was a young professor, there was an issue of whether or not one twin could be operated on to remove a kidney, to be given to another twin.

And, you know, that case went all the way through -- the federal government never got involved in that. That was up to the state of Massachusetts. They made interesting decisions.

Some states go the other way.

Half the countries of Europe go one way. The other half go the other way. And just as Justice Brandeis once said that things are the laboratories of Constitutional experimentation.

They have the right to do things their own way. And then we'll see over time. Over time, I predict that we will find that this kind of surgery, is not acceptable scientifically for young people.

And the New York Times had an absurd op-ed yesterday. By the mother of a transgender person.

And it never mentioned. It originally said that the person was now 18 years old.

And the decision does not apply to anyone who is 18.

You know, just wait. Don't make irreversible decisions while you're 12 years old. Or 13 years old.

Because we know the statistics show, that some people, at least, regret having made these irreversible decisions, particularly. Yeah.

GLENN: So why is it -- why is it that the state. Why wasn't the argument, you can't do this to children?

ALAN: Well, you know, that's the question.

Whether or not if the state says, you can do it to children, that violates the Constitution. I think states are given an enormous amount of leeway, this. Deciding what's best for people.

You leave it to the public.

And, you know, for me, if I were, you know, voting. I would not vote to allow a 17-year-old to make that irreversible decision. But if the state wants to do it. If a country in Europe wants to do it. All right!

But the idea that there's a constitutional right for a minor, who can't -- isn't old enough to consent to a contract, to have sex, is old enough to consent to do something that will change their life forever, and they will come to regret, is -- is absurd.

GLENN: So I don't know how you feel about Justice Thomas. But he -- he took on the so-called experts.

And -- and really kind of took him to the woodshed. What were your thoughts on that?

ALAN: Well, I agree with that. I devoted my whole life to challenging experts. That's what I do in court.

I challenge experts all the time. But most of the major cases that I've won, have been cases where experts went one way, and we were -- persuaded a jury or judge. That the expert is not really an expert.

Experts have become partisans, just like everybody else.

And so I'm glad that expert piece is being challenged by judges.

And, you know, experts ought to challenge judges, judges challenge experts. That's the world we live in. Everybody challenges everybody else. As long as all of us are allowed to speak, allowed to have our point of view expressed, allowed to vote, that's democracy.

Democracy does not require a singular answer to complex medical, psychological, moral problems. We can have multiple answers.

We're not a dictatorship. We're not in North Korea or Iran, where the ayatollah or the leader tells us what to think. We can think for ourselves, and we can act for ourselves.

GLENN: Yeah. It's really interesting because this is my argument with Obamacare.

I was dead set against Obamacare. But I wasn't against Romneycare when it was in Massachusetts. If that's what Massachusetts wants to do, Massachusetts can do it. Try it.

And honestly, if it would work in a state, we would all adopt it.

But the problem is, that some of these things, like Romneycare, doesn't work. And so they want to -- they want to rope the federal government into it. Because the federal government can just print money. You know, any state wants to do anything.

For instance, I have a real hard time with California right now.

Because I have a feeling, when they fail, we will be roped into paying for the things that we all knew were bad ideas.

Why? Why should I pay for it in Texas, when I know it wouldn't work?

And I've always wanted to live in California, but I don't, because I know that's not going to work.

ALAN: Yeah. But conservatives sometimes take the opposite point of view.

Take guns, for example.

The same Justice Thomas says that I state cannot have the authority to decide that guns should not be available in time square.

Or in schools. There has to be a national openness to guns. Because of the second apple.

And -- you can argue reasonably, what the Second Amendment means.

But, you know, conservatives -- many conservatives take the view that it has to be a single standard for the United States.

It can't vary in their decision how to control -- I'm your favorite --

GLENN: Isn't that -- doesn't that -- doesn't that just take what the -- what the Bill of Rights is about, and turns it upside the head?

I mean, it says, anything not mentioned here, the states have the rights.

But they -- they cannot. The federal government cannot get involved in any of these things.

And these are rights that are enshrined.

So, I mean, because you could say that, but, I mean, when it comes to health care, that's not in the Constitution. Not in the Bill of Rights.

ALAN: Oh, no.

There's a big difference, of course.

The Second Amendment does provide for the right to bear arms.

The question is whether it's interpreted in light of the beginning of the Second Amendment. Which says, essentially, a well-regulated, well-regulated militia. Whether that applies to private ownership as well.

Whether it could be well-regulated by states.

Look, these are interesting debates.

And the Supreme Court, you know, decides these.

But all I'm saying is that many of these decisions are in some way, influenced by ideology.

The words of the Constitution, don't speak like, you know, the Ten Commandments and God, giving orders from on high.

They're often written in ambiguous terms. Even the Ten Commandments. You know, it says, thou shall not murder. And it's been interpreted by some to say, thou shall not still, the Hebrew word is (foreign language), for murder, not kill. And, of course, we know that in parts of the Bible, you are allowed to kill your enemies, if they come after you to kill you, rise up and kill them first.

So, you know, everything -- human beings are incapable of writing with absolute clarity, about complex issues.

That's why we need institutions to interpret them. The institutions should be fair.

And the Supreme Court is sometimes taking over too much authority, too much power.

I have an article today, with gay stone.

Can had starts with a quote from the book of Ruth.

And it says, when judges rule the land, there was famine.

And I say, judges were not supposed to ever rule, going back to Biblical times.

Judges are supposed to judge.

People who are elected or pointed appropriately. Are the ones supposed to rule.

GLENN: Quickly. Two other topics. And I know you have to go.

If I can get a couple of quick takes on you.

The Democrats that are being handcuffed, and throwing themselves into situations.

Do you find that to be a sign of a fascistic state or a publicity stunt?

ALAN: A publicity stunt. And they would knit it. You know, give them a drink at 11 o'clock in the bar. They will tell you, they are doing this deliberately to get attention.

Of course, a guy who is running behind in the mayor race in New York, goes and gets himself arrested. And now he's on every New York television station. And probably will move himself up in the polls.

So no.

Insular -- I don't believe in that. And I don't believe we should take it -- take it seriously.

GLENN: Last question.

I am proudly for Israel.

But I'm also for America. And I'm really tired of foreign wars.

And I think you can be pro-Israel and pro-America at the same time.

I don't think you can -- you don't have to say, I'm for Israel, defending themselves, and then that makes me a warmonger.

I am also very concerned about Iran. And have been for a very long time.

Because they're Twelvers. They're Shia Twelvers. That want to wash the world in blood. To hasten the return of the promised one.

So when they have a nuclear weapon. It's a whole different story.

ALAN: No, I agree with you, Tucker Carlson, is absolutely wrong, when he say he has to choose between America first or supporting Israel. Supporting Israel in this fight against Iran, is being America first.

It's supporting America. Israel has been doing all the hard work. It's been the one who lost its civilians and fortunately, none of its pilots yet.

But America and Israel work together in the interest of both countries.

So I'm -- I'm a big supporter of the United States, the patriarch. And I'm a big supporter of Israel at the same time.

Because they work together in tandem, to bring about Western -- Western values.

GLENN: Should we drop a bomb?

ALAN: Yes, we should.

GLENN: Our plane drop the bomb?

ALAN: Yes, we should. And without killing civilians. It can be done. Probably needs four bombs, not one bomb. First, one bomb to open up the mountain. Then another bomb to destroy what's going on inside.

And in my book The Preventive State, I make the case for when preventive war is acceptable. And the war against Iran is as acceptable as it would have been to attack Nazi Germany in the 1930s. If we had done that, if Britain and France had attacked Nazi Germany in the 1930s, instead of allowing it to be built up, it could have saved 60 million lives. And so sometimes, you have to take preventive actions to save lives.

GLENN: What is the preventive state out, Alan?

ALAN: Just now. Just now.

Very well on Amazon.

New York Times refuses to review it. Because I defended Donald Trump.

And Harvard club cancelled my appearance talked about the book. Because I haven't been defending Harvard. I've been defending President Trump's attack. By the way, they called Trump to Harvard: Go fund yourself.
(laughter)

GLENN: Okay.

Let's -- I would love to have you back on next week. To talk about the preventive state. If you will. Thank you, Alan. I appreciate it. Alan Dershowitz. Harvard Law school, professor emeritus, host of the Dershow. And the author of the new book that's out now, The Preventive State.

I think that's a really important topic. Because we are -- we are traveling down the roads, where fascism, on both sides, where fascism can start to creep in. And it's all for your own good.

It's all for your own protection. Be aware. Be aware.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

They want to control what you eat! — Cattle rancher's stark warning

American cattle rancher Shad Sullivan tells Glenn Beck that there is a "War on Beef" being waged by the globalist elites and that Americans need to be prepared for this to be an ongoing battle. How secure is America's food supply chain, and what does the country need to do to ensure food shortages never occur in the future?

Watch Glenn's FULL Interview with Shad Sullivan HERE