RADIOSeptember 22, 2023

Did the CIA BRIBE experts to dismiss COVID lab leak theory?

It's been nearly 4 years since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out and we still don't have a consensus on where it came from. But recently, a whistleblower has claimed to Congress that the CIA bribed experts to suggest that COVID-19 didn't come from a lab. Rep. Brad Wenstrup, who chairs one of the subcommittees the whistleblower has spoken to, joins Glenn with the latest. According to the whistleblower, 6 of the 7 people on the CIA's COVID discovery team believed the virus came from a lab, but the CIA only said it was "unable to determine" the truth. And allegedly, there were "performance bonuses" attached to their findings. Did the CIA bribe experts to remain silent? Is the government trying to steer the narrative in one direction for political reasons? What does that mean about the trustworthiness of our intelligence agencies?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Congressman Wenstrup, how are you, sir?

WENSTRUP: I'm hanging in there. How are you, Glenn?

GLENN: I'm good. First of all, I want to let people know. You are a doctor. You're also an Army Reserve officer, and Iraqi war veteran. Thank you for that.

You were on the select subcommittee run by this pandemic. You have served as a doctor. You know, overseas. You also were at Walter Reed for a while.

And you are the medical policy adviser for the chief of Army Reserve. Correct?

WENSTRUP: Yes, actually retired from the Army in December.

But since I was elected to Congress, 11 years ago, I served at Walter Reed and as a medical policy adviser as well.

Obviously as a congressman.

And a congressman on the intelligence committee.

GLENN: Okay. So now, tell the story to the American people, in case they don't know. About what is going on, with the CIA. And this bribe, to the so-called experts.

WENSTRUP: Yeah. A little background. As a physician, ever since the pandemic started. I'm looking into what's going on, physiologically, how do we treat patients?

In the process of doing research, we discovered that we were actually engaging in China, in the lab in Wuhan, to create gain-of-function viruses.

That being said, with Intel committee, involved with this for the past three years, at least.

And what had happened now, is we have somebody coming forward, as the whistle-blower, seeking full whistle-blower protection.

And at this time, he wants to be anonymous. He came to both the intelligence committee, and the select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic, which I chair.

And he's made many allegations. Obviously, he summed up a lot of them. But there was the CIA, in trying to figure out, whether this came from a lab. Or from nature. Put together, a COVID discovery team, if you will.

Seven people, as you talked about.

So six of the people, they came to the conclusion with some level of confidence. That this came from a lab. And the senior person, according to these charges, said, it came from nature. Okay. Well, you're entitled to your opinion. What they ended up doing at the end of the day, releasing to the public and to the intelligence community. All they said was, the CIA was unable to determine.

Well, it sounds like they had a pretty high number of people, that were able to determine, as best as they know it. It is our responsibility, on this committee, to follow up on everything to do with the -- with the pandemic.

We take it very seriously. The reaction of the CIA, very serious.

So we're now seeking documents. Communications.

And we also have asked to speak with Andrew McCreedus (phonetic), who the whistle-blower says was the chief operating officer, and had a lot to do with constructing this.

I hope the director of the CIA will be cooperative with us.

But, you know, you hit the big question.

Why? I mean, why would they want to do that?

I mean, this goes back to where Fauci prompted. I'm using their words. Prompted a group of scientists to write what's called proximal origins.

Where in their internal documents, they're saying, oh, yeah. Well, they're doing research. Oh, yeah. They have this capability.

Oh, yeah. This really is something. And then they come out and say, it came from nature. And tried to make that definitive. Why are we not having scientific debate? What is the reason for attempting to steer everything in one direction? And here's one of my concerns, Glenn. And I think you will appreciate this. If this is true, and we have for political reasons. Or whatever.

Changing the -- the notion of changing intelligence. What does that say to our international partners, who rely on us, for intelligence?

Who we work with? Together on intelligence.

If our own intelligence department, is changing things from what people actually did and said. To fit a narrative that they want?

That's a concern I have.

GLENN: Well, not just that.

You know, you would imagine that in some cases, you would say, hey, let's not release that to anybody.

But this is changing things for the intelligence.

The oversight. You guys are -- you guys are engaged with oversight. And they didn't tell you this. A whistle-blower had to come and tell you this.

WENSTRUP: Right. And I would contend if we didn't have Republicans, in terms of the House of Representatives, it would come forward at all. To get an opportunity to somebody, that would seem like would listen. And is a whistle-blower.

And we are. And so we're pursuing this based on letters.

That's the first phase, requesting information. Documents.

You know, when we don't get them. And we dig a little bit deeper.

And we ask a little harder. And sometimes in the form of subpoenas.

GLENN: So they -- do we know if they actually paid these other experts?

These six people out of seven?

WENSTRUP: Yeah. So in the allegations, I would say that the conjecture, is that it may have come in the form of a performance bonus.
Not just out and out, hey, do this, and here's some money, if you are following that. Something to that effect. Right?

GLENN: Right. And do we have any idea how much? This is taxpayer dollars, right?

WENSTRUP: Oh, correct. And, no. We don't know how much. And, again, that's part of the investigation. We're obligated to do it. I mean, we don't really have a choice. This is what we should be doing. You know, keep in mind, I have to remember members of Congress this too. Congress created these agencies. And we fund those agencies. And we have oversight of those agencies. And not only do I have to remind members of Congress. We certainly have to remind the agencies, that this needs to be a working partnership. And you don't get to tell us anything. Especially on the intelligence committee. The intelligence committee is set up, so that there would be oversight over the intelligence committee.

GLENN: Correct.

WENSTRUP: And this is a select committee, so the people on this committee, which, by the way, is functioning well now, and is no longer an impeachment committee, but the intelligence committee, people are selected from both sides of the aisle. We also represent the other members of Congress. Because we're in a place where other members don't get to go. So this is an important role that we have. And the cooperation needs to be there. And sometimes, the community -- the intelligence community, thinks they don't have to tell us things. In the same statute that they do. So we will continue to pursue and find the truth. And we have -- we have to suggest or legislate things into law.

It allows us to hold people accountable, within agencies, when they do things.

And I use an example like this, Glenn. The military just served 25 years.

Uniform Code of Military Justice. Unethical is unlawful in the military.

And our agencies, unfortunately, this is across-the-board.

But in our agencies, if you violate some of your tenets, or what you say, or the rules of engagement within your agency, nothing really happens to you.

Oh, you might get fired.

But, you know, there -- this is -- this is a problem, that we have.

And so we are trying, on so many fronts, to put punitive measures in place when violations are occurring.

Such as, with the FISA court. Et cetera.

You know, the IG said 17 times.

Well, what actually happens? Where is the punitive measures? We're trying to implement those.

GLENN: Yeah. So do you -- is there a way out from -- I mean, your Justice Department looks horribly soiled. Your NSA. Your CIA. Your DNI.

All of these things, look like they've been a part of some really bad things, including the State Department. Now the IRS is involved. How are you possibly going to beat this?

I mean, it's like Whac-A-Mole.

WENSTRUP: Yeah. On my particular subcommittee. What I keep saying.

From the beginning. Is honesty and truth is non-negotiable. And we're going to be looking for it.

And if it's not there. We're going to point it out. And hold people accountable.

We have to.

GLENN: But you can't -- excuse me for interrupting.

But you can't really hold people responsible, if you say if they're in contempt for Congress.

Attorney general Garland. Is the one who has to prosecute. And he just came out and said, I'm not the prosecutor, for Congress.

Well, yes, you are.

But he gets to decide, who he prosecutes.

WENSTRUP: Yeah. And obviously what you're seeing, I know I heard Jim Jordan's voice when I came. And obviously you're seeing all kinds of things, where this is just wrong.

And I don't know how we get it all out from the American public. Most people don't know.

Obviously, I have the opportunity right now. To get to your listeners.

And that's important.

But there are things, that are going on today, that should be above the full front page headlines.

Each and every day.

And the mainstream media comes to our challenges, is definitely greater.

And elections matter.

And I hope people understand that. I grow up watching Superman. The beginning show.

Watching for truth, justice, and the American way. And then that's where we have to go.

And Americans have to understand, if that's what they want, or not. Because it's been deviated from, tremendously.

And let me make this suggestion too for our agencies. You know, in the military, you either move up, or you're out.

And you're required to be agnostic politically. And that's what we need in our agencies.

You either move up or you're out.

And when you get to the top, there's a mandatory retirement. You don't get to sit there with mounds of authority. And covert authority, if you will. And we have to make changes like that, within our system.

We started our country, with just three agencies. State Treasury and War.

Look what we have now. They have rule of law. They put out regulations.

We try to get laws to stop them.

It's completely backwards.

So Americans need to understand. To elect people that are willing to make that change, and get us back to the government, that you are Founders set up.

STU: Representative Brad Wenstrup. Thank you very much for what you're doing.

Please keep us informed, if there's any other news that starts to break here about the CIA apparently bribing members of the team.

The experts on COVID. Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

WENSTRUP: Yeah. Thank you so much.

GLENN: You bet.

Is it TOO LATE to escape the leftist plan for global CHAOS?

Leftists around the globe have been pushing us closer and closer to chaos, seemingly in line with the CIA's 5 steps to revolution. Glenn reviews the steps and asks, which one are we on? But while governments around the world seem to be spiraling toward authoritarianism, Glenn explains why he's shocked to see the election of anarcho-capitalist Javier Milei in Argentina. While he looks and sounds unhinged, he's promising to SHRINK the government, not expand it. "That's what makes him less scary," Glenn says. So, are people starting to take a stand against big government and the 5 steps to revolution?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: These are the five steps, for revolution. It's -- you know, he accurately said in the clip I played for you a minute ago. The CIA developed this.

And it was four revolutions. Green and Colour Revolutions. And it's really easy. You have to discredit the press. Now, once you advertise credit the press, you also have to discredit intelligentsia. You have to -- you have to discredit all the experts. Well, they've done both of these, themselves.

Okay? And I don't think that it is a coincidence. That it works out. Everything that the left does, doesn't it always seem to be a win-win for them?

Whether it works. Whether it doesn't. They always seems to win. It always works in their favor.

So they've discredited the press.

They've discredited the experts.

How easy would it be to regain the trust of our doctors and our -- our scientists, if they would just come out and say, yeah. We really blew it here.

And we're finding the people responsible for it.

We know it was Fauci.

Why wouldn't you do that?

Because they want experts to continue to be discredited.

By the average.

So that way, when there's chaos on the street, do you trust the police?

Do you trust the FBI?

Do you trust the medical association?

Do you trust the media?

Who is coming for you? If there's real trouble, who is coming. Did you see the video of the guy in the streets of New York? He was a regular guy, standing up in the streets of New York. The press was asking him questions about, you know, why are you standing up against the letting people across the border.

And he looked at the person. The reporter.

And then he looked at the crowd, and he said, guys, it's up to us.

No one is coming to save our city.

No one is coming to save our state or our Constitution. No one is coming. The news is not telling you the truth. The politicians are part of it. The politicians are the ones doing it to us!

We have to stand up. So that way, if everything is discredited, you feel like, you have to stand up. And then things get even more out of control, because somebody does something stupid. Or something is set up to make it look like, that other side is doing something.

And they can crack down. Everybody cries out for order.

Look at what's happening. In the news today, I was reading a couple of stories.

Chicago area high school provides segregated classes for black and Hispanic students.

Now, any time, in modern history, we would know that's racist.

You can't do that.

What are you doing?

What is it doing?

It is creating hostilities between races. It's creating separate classes.

Except, it's just reversed.

What is that going to do? Did you see there was another story -- where was this one? Maybe New York. Where the students, black and Hispanics, are no longer going to be held to that white standard of education. Now, what does that mean? You're going to lower the standards? Really? That's a white thing. Because I know a lot of dummy white people. What does that do? That just makes you into a slave. If you have poor education. And you're not held to a higher standard, what do you think is going to happen to our society? More than 2500 police officers in New York City, have quit this year. New York City is also a place where -- what was it? 2 billion -- I can't find it now. But the amount of money. I think it's $2.4 billion. That has been lost this year, in theft! In theft!

Businesses are closing. They can't handle the amount of theft. What does that make you do? Makes you cry out for somebody to make it stop. Now, this is the way they're trying to make Argentinians. The Argentinian president, look. Like he's crazy and a fascist. But I want you to look at what he says. I don't necessarily like the way he says it. He uses the S-word a lot. But listen to what he's saying about the left in Argentina.

VOICE: You can't give leftists an engine.

VOICE: Can you define leftist?

VOICE: All collectivists. All kinds of collectivists.

VOICE: But why do you call them sheep?

VOICE: Because they are. If you think differently from them, they will kill you.

This is the point. You can't give sheep an engine. If you give them an inch, they will use it to destroy you.

You can't negotiate with left hearts. You don't negotiate. You don't negotiate with trash because they will end you.

They, the left, have a guy that beats his wife off.

If it's one of them, he puts on the green scarf, and yells at neoliberalism all the time. And they hide it. Suddenly there's a journalist that molests another journalist.

They hide it. When it's one of them, they hide it. They hide all of those apparitions.

Now, if you are on the other side, they will ruin you. They will kill you. They will throw you everything. They don't care if they ruin your whole life. Why?

Only because you don't think like that. And do you know what is the good part in all of this?

Because since to err is human, since everyone can be mistaken, they force us to be better. And since we are getting better than them. Since we are crushing them in the cultural battle, we are not only superior economically, we are morally superior. We are better aesthetically superior. We are better than them at everything. And that triggers them. And since they can't beat us with real arguments, they just use the repressive apparatus of the state. With loads of taxpayer money to destroy us. And yet, they're still losing. They had to remove the blacklist. They had to remove the blacklist. You understand, they're losing. They're desperate. Leftists are losing the cultural battle. For the first time ever, they are cornered. Those leftists.

GLENN: Now, when you watch him, he looks a little nuts.

STU: He has an interesting aesthetic going on there.

He has the crazy hair. Very passionate.

But that's a way. You know, people use that to dismiss him. Obviously, at their own peril.

GLENN: Correct. But listen to what they're saying. Why do we think this is about the Democrats and the Republicans?

Why are we fighting over stupid parties? When this is being fought now in Ireland. When it's being fought in several countries in Europe. This is being fought. He was just elected as president of Argentina. This isn't an American problem.

This isn't about Trump supporters. This isn't about the Tea Partiers.

They want you to believe that it is. But it's not. It's about standing up against an ideology, of collectivism.

That's what this is about. They believe that there are ranchers, and sheep. And if you agree with them, maybe you could be a rancher.

Otherwise, get into the pen. You're sheep.

And you will be slaughtered, if the sheep ever figure out. Wait a minute. There's more of us than them. You will be slaughtered.

That's what we're arguing about.

We're not arguing about tax policy or anything else.

You know, this guy is a great example. You hear this from somebody on the right in Europe. It can be very scary. Because you don't know. Because in Europe, left and right is very different. The left is communism. The right is fascism.

Both of those are oppressive. And death prescriptions. Horrible, horrible systems.

Here, the left is totalitarianism, of any kind. Theological. Leftist. Fascistic. Any of this stuff. Communism.

That's all on the left. In America, the right is anarchy.

The government is so small, that it can't do anything. And the very extreme of that, is anarchy.

We're just inside, out of reach of anarchy. That's what American conservatives should be fighting for. That's what makes this guy less scary.

Now, he can change. Maybe he's a fraud.

I don't know.

But what he's saying, he's going to do is dismantle all of the power centers.

He's going to dismantle their Federal Reserve. Their central bank.

He says, they're controlling the finances. They're controlling the money. They're controlling everything. And they're debasing and devaluing the money of the average person.

Well, same here! But if you speak out against the Federal Reserve. You're a crackpot.

I'm a fascist, because I believe that no secret cabal of bankers and banks, should decide what my money is worth?

That should decide what they can print and not print?

That my children have to pay for?

I'm a fascist because I believe that that shouldn't exist?

This is -- he's right.

They are losing it is going to come right down to the wire.

And I think AI is going to play a big role.

But if we stay sane, keep our wits and our heads, and our Judeo Christian ethics about us. And we let people see our ethics.

Nobody wants to hang out with people who are screaming, you know, death to the Jews.

At least, I hope not. And that's what they're becoming.

Shout your abortion.

Death to the Jews.

Take and mutilate children.

Teach children in school, that they should be protesters, above everything else. And that they can be whatever they want, and it starts with not listening to your parents. Because you know better than your parents. And we're on your side. Who wants that?

That's what this is really all about. And I hope he does exactly what he says, he's going to do.

Attempted MURDERERS among Palestinians RELEASED in hostage deal

The temporary truce between Israel and Hamas required Israel to release THREE Palestinian prisoners for every hostage Hamas releases (so much for fair deals). But who are these prisoners and why were they arrested? The media describes them as "mostly women and children." But Glenn did some digging and found out the truth. What the media should report is that the vast majority of these released prisoners are teenage boys, including some who opened fire on Jews, threw rocks at Jews, stabbed policemen, committed arson, and attempted to murder Israelis. So, will the media report on this? Or will they continue their history of praising "mostly peaceful" riots ...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. So Hamas kidnapped children. Kids as young as four years old. I think they have a couple of babies, still. And they were exchanged, for what will be three times as many Palestinian security prisoners.

So Hamas is getting a pretty good deal.

STU: Wait a minute. I was told, everyone was very concerned about proportionate response.

Proportionate response would be the same amount. But no one seems concerned about it anymore. Why is that? I don't know!

GLENN: I don't know. I can't find a story about it.

STU: I can't either. No one is mentioning it, what a surprise.

GLENN: And I couldn't find a story today.

Finally found one, and it is from the Jerusalem Post. What a surprise. But had to look for 30 minutes!

Finally had to have one of my researchers find it.

I went to Jerusalem.

I couldn't even find it.

40 Israeli hostages were taken by Hamas. Three times as many Palestinian prisoners.

So who are they?

Well, they're women and minors, most of them.

Oh. Okay.

STU: Children.

GLENN: What did the children and women do?

Can't find them. Find a list of everybody's name.

But can't find even the charges.

STU: You know what I heard this morning?

GLENN: What?

STU: Most Palestinian young men and boys will be arrested bit Israeli military at some point in their lives. That was the --

GLENN: Really? The same ones that were toddlers, that were taught in preschool, how to kill Jews?

STU: Yes.

GLENN: Those people.

STU: At some point in their lives.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: At some point the Israeli military will come after them, because of who they are.

GLENN: Okay. So one of them was 16 years old.

He was from the West Bank, otherwise known as Judea and Samaria.

He was connected with FATA, FATA. And he was convicted of opening fire on Jews.

Now, he didn't kill anybody. Injured people.

But he didn't kill anybody. And he's a minor.

So he was given a sentence of five years, and two months in jail.

Oh, the humanity!

Can you imagine, if you had a 16-year-old kid in let's say, Chicago. That was just going to open up his gun, on a crowd of people. And just target them to kill them.

Every intent to kill them. But they were 16 years old. And they only injured several.

What would we do?

Would we give them five years? Two months in jail.

I think so.

Then you have Saudi Abu Adii of the West Bank. He was connected with Hamas. He was arrested when he was 17. This is one of the boys that they are saying, are being released. He was 17. He'll turn 18 in March.

He also opened fire on Jews, as well as throwing rocks. Breaking traffic laws. He was in pre-verdict detention, pending the outcome of his trial.

So this guy, this guy is just in trial. Remember, he -- April 2nd, 2023. He opened fire on a group of Jews to kill them, and then threw rocks.

The worst thing I could find was some of these people, they endangered security officials or threatened them, or they threw rocks.

STU: Yeah, I heard the throwing rocks thing.

As if, first of all, that's nothing. Throwing rocks at police officers is nothing.

GLENN: Well, throwing rocks, especially when you connect it to opening fire on Jews and throwing rocks. Kind of takes a different feel.

STU: There.

GLENN: Mora Beck here, of East Jerusalem, and connected with Hamas, arrested October 2015, at the age of 16.

She stabbed a border policeman who survived. She was sentenced to eight and a half years in prison.

Another prisoner to be released is Ahmed Marzook, 18, arrested four months ago for assaulting police, arson, possession of weapons, and other charges.

Amani Heshem, 37, arrested in December, 2016, charged with inflicting grievous bodily harm. Armed with knives and daggers. Then you have Walia Khalid Fazi Tangy. How many names? 26-year-old, arrested in August of last year, was charged with attempted murder and possession of weapons and explosives.

So last August, he was arrested. He's 26.

You know, one of the boys that may have been threatening security of Israel of some sort.

Significant minority. Significant minority, committing crimes that were either killing people, or attempted to kill people.

The remaining majority supported or were involved with a terror group, in some dangerous way. The oldest Palestinian on the release list, I think is the 59-year-old woman, who has the scars on her face.

Did you see her come home?

Yeah. She's horribly disfigured.

She was in a --

STU: Israel do that to her?

GLENN: No. No. She was in a car accident. Well, it wasn't a car accident. It was more like a suicide bombing vest, and she -- she caught on fire. And gosh, darn it, gosh darn it, just this innocent woman that, you know, almost burned to death. And was probably treated in an Israeli hospital. But don't worry, we're swapping them for 4-year-olds. And I think that's equal.

STU: Proportionate response.

GLENN: It is. Thank you for that. Thank you for that.

It is hard to watch this play out. I mean, it's hard to watch the families. And not feel good about it. I mean, I can't hold it against -- if this was my children, I would be feeling the same way. I don't care. Let her go. Let her go.

Being able to see some of the faces that were on the abducted posters that were torn down by so many. To see the faces of them returned and united with family members, if not their parents, because if many of their parents were killed. Many of their mothers and sisters were raped violently.

I don't know if you're following what is being now exposed.

But Elon Musk was there yesterday.

And I think he got an eyeful.

I don't know if you've been -- I don't know if you -- if you have been following what they have been doing to the women.

Now, Hamas says no, no, no. This is against the Koran.

Is it? Oh, tree.

Oh, tree. Shout out.

There's a Jew behind that rock.

Really? Really?

They say, it's -- it's against the Koran, to be able to rape a woman.

Well, what if they're an infidel.

I think we went through this with Barbary Pirates. I think we went through some of this.

They raped women and children.

Sometimes one person who has now testified as an eyewitness said, this one girl was being raped horribly. Her pelvis and her legs were broken.

And she was passed around. And then when they were done, while he was still in her, shot her in the back of the head. That's the kind of depravity we're dealing with. It is horrendous. And just for the Christmas spirit, you know, the -- the ghost of Hamas past will visit again, unless we snuff it out. And, you know what, the ghost of Hamas future, we need to choose now. Because these things are not coming here. These things are already here. Look at what is being said loudly. Proudly. Our campuses. By people we thought maybe some people thought were allies. Saying it on our streets. Saying it to people.

Meaning it. This is man made hell. And demons on our streets, who revel in blood and death. And it is already here. So we have to choose life, or choose death.

That is -- that is as simple as it gets.

Choose life. That's it.

I don't want to be a culture. I don't want to be part of the culture of death.

And I'm sorry. If you say you're going to do this to people. I take you at your word.

You know, I saw a little boy run to his mom.

And that was a piece of heaven in the here and now. But October 7th was the gaping mouth of hell itself. And it is also here and now.

So how do we -- how is there contact between heaven and hell? How is this possible?

We don't understand it, because we don't understand our own divine nature. God gave humans power of creation.

Everything you think, everything you believe, is creative. I just want you to think of this.

How are people destroying our country? Right now, how are they destroying us? They knew you couldn't destroy America from the outside, right? It had to come from within.

And once it came from within, you divide and conquer.

Is that only true for countries and civilizations? Or can we look at the small data, and look at us as individuals.

Are we being divided as a one individual.

Are you being divided, from who you really are?

To what you -- what people want you to be.

What they want you to believe.

About yourself.

Do you believe in good anymore?

Do you believe you're a force for good? Do you believe you know what the truth is, anymore?

Truth hasn't changed.

It hasn't changed.

We have.

Society has.

Our governments have.

But the truth hasn't changing.

They have divided each of us internally, from the truth. That's how you conquer a whole people. You divide them up inside. You get them to stop believing in goodness. In decency. Stop getting -- stop them from saying, wait a minute. This is wrong. I don't care what you say. You've gone insane!

The MAJOR CRISIS hidden within OpenAI's Sam Altman drama

Less than a week after his ouster, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman was reinstated in order to avoid a company-wide revolt. But while the media wants you to believe that this crazy story is about billionaires and capitalism, Glenn believes there's something more sinister at play. Shortly before Altman's firing, staff researchers expressed concerns to the company's board of directors about a new artificial intelligence discovery that they believed could threaten our existence. Called Q* (pronounced Q-Star), the project could lead to a breakthrough in artificial general intelligence. Glenn explains what this next phase of AI would mean for humanity and why it's especially concerning that AI bots like ChatGPT are already being programmed with woke biases: "Don't fear the machine. Fear the people who are coding the machine."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Sam Altman was let go of open AI. He was one of the cofounders.

Open AI is ChatGPT and everything else. They're working on artificial intelligence.

In particular, so you don't get lost in the terms here.

AI is what we have now.

It's artificial intelligence. It can do one thing. It can play chess, it can find songs for you on Spotify.

It can answer questions from the Internets. That's AI.

It can do one thing really well.

We are general intelligence. We have a lot of intelligence, as human beings over a myriad of categories.

Some people are better at one thing, rather than the other. But you can do multiple things.

That's --

STU: You're able to learn a new thing. That's a big part of it.

GLENN: Right. It can be a self-priming pump.

So once we learn how to pump water, once we learn how to learn, we can learn anything we want.

STU: Right.

GLENN: And master it.

If we take the time.

That's AGI. Artificial General Intelligence.

That's you. That's a person, at the highest level.

STU: And can run at infinite speed.

That's the key thing.

GLENN: Correct. Never stops.

STU: If you could theoretically teach yourself French, which you could, if you spent the time. This could teach itself French in seconds because it can do that process, obviously a lot faster than a human being.

GLENN: And we have seen that it teaches itself languages that we're not teaching.

Okay? So it's -- it's already beginning to say, I need to know Arabic. And it will learn Arabic, its own.

We don't know how it's happening. This is the problem with AI. We don't know what's really going on.

It's like a black box.

And even the scientists don't know how this is working. It's just working.

We're not at the self-priming place yet. Had you ever been, this new -- what's called Q star. We know very little about it.

Except, it is possibly at the center of Altman's firing. Huge Star, they say, could be a breakthrough in the search for what's known as AGI. Artificial General Intelligence.

Let's see. Open AI defines AGI as autonomous systems that surpass humans in most economically valuable tasks.

Now, before this discovery, they were talking about how AI will lead to 300 million layoffs.

300 million people will lose their job.

That's with AI. AGI is better than humans. Okay?

Because it gets very competent, very, very fast.

Right now, I think this Q Star is at an elementary school level of math. The last time that happened, it took six months, before it was the age of 21. And way past college-level math. So these things happen really, really quickly.

We don't have any information yet, this.

But this, I believe, is inevitable. Ray Kurzweil told me years ago, he thought it would be 2030, that we would hit possibly AGI. 2050, ASI.

The ASI. Because we don't know you had AGI is going to work. We have no idea how this whole AI thing is even working.

Some people say, we'll never get to AGI. We'll never get to artificial super intelligence. ASI.

I think we're around the corner from it.

I think we're in the next five years, from seeing this.

And that changes absolutely everything.

Everything.

Right now, there was a leak before the conference. Where the CEO of Spotify mentioned at a dinner, that co-pilot AI. Which is a code writing thing.

Wrote a million lines of their code.

That should send a chill down everybody's spine who is taking coding.

If you're learning to code.

Really?

The AI just wrote a million lines of the code for Spotify.

That's staggering.

Staggering.

And we're just at the beginning.

Also, they're working on something -- you know what an LLM is?

A large language model.

STU: That's like ChatGPT.

GLENN: Correct. Take language. And it's massive.

And it's taking inputs from everywhere.

They are now working on an SLM.

Their small language models. That will allow you to have your own AI. Writing just for you.

That you can control. Supposedly, correctly.

And that is the fully formed AI right on your desktop.

Now, here's the -- here's the problem with all of this.

I think the first time I ever wrote about this, eight, nine years ago.

I said, don't fear the machine.

Fear the people who are coding the machine.

Okay?

To an the trolley problem, the classic trolley problem?

The trolley problem is you've got two tracks. And a trolley is coming down.

And the trolley is out of control.

And the driver can only switch tracks.

That's all he can do. And so he can go where there's five men working on the track. And plow through them. Or he can switch tracks. And go for one man.

Who is working on the other track.

The question is: What should the conductor do?

Answer.

STU: So it's five men.

GLENN: Five men, working on one track.

STU: What's the other option?

GLENN: Gun guy on the second track.

STU: I mean, in theory, right.

They should kill the one man. Because they would save four people's lives.

GLENN: Which means what?

STU: They murdered a person.

GLENN: No. Life is valuable.

STU: Life is valuable, and you should try to eliminate as -- if you're going to have to kill someone. Kill one instead of five. Right?

GLENN: Now. Some people. This is parallel. Some people have a -- have a conflict with this one, and the trolley case.

I don't. I think it's the same. Suppose that a judge or a magistrate, is faced with rioters, demanding that a culprit be found for a certain crime.

Otherwise, they're going to take their own bloody revenge, five hostages, that they have.

Sound familiar?

Okay. The real culprit is unknown.

But the judge has the opportunity, to prevent bloodshed on these five, by saying, I've got the culprit, even though he's innocent. I've got the culprit.

And we're going to execute him.

And that would save the lives of the five, if you get rid of the one.

STU: Assuming, of course, the people who are willing to murder five people are trustworthy.

GLENN: Yes. Correct. Correct. That's not in this equation.

STU: Okay. Sure. Sure.

GLENN: Okay. So what should you do?

STU: That's amazing. Because forever, our answer to that is the process and the rules stay the same. People have constitutional rights. We don't murder someone, before their trial. Or anything like that.

To please a mob.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: I will say, recently, let's just say, I don't know.

Spring, summer, 2020.

Around that time, I started seeing the opposite thing happening.

Where they will come out and say, this guy is guilty.

We're going to do everything we can at him.

To appease the mob.

So they don't riot and burn down a city.

That equation has seemingly changed in the eyes of many governments around the country.

GLENN: It has. But what is the right answer?

STU: I think what the right answer is. Is to go to approach it with the principles and process that have been established. Where you have no civilization.

So it is a terrible, terrible thing. But you have to go through it the way and hope that they don't actually execute the five people. And you go through the process, as normal through the legal system.

GLENN: So --

STU: We don't negotiate with terrorists.

GLENN: So one, one is -- the sacrifice of one, on the trolley.

Is better than the five.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: But the five who are being held hostage, not as important as the one.

How do you solve that?

STU: Well, I mean, I think they are different questions. At some level.

GLENN: Yes, they are.

One is a run away train. One is not.

STU: One is random. One is to do with the process of the country.

But --

GLENN: And there's only two ways.

STU: There is a legitimate altering for saying the one in the court case.

And a lot of it is, cooler heads can prevail.

If you can persuade the crowd to calm down now, maybe in six months, when the trial happens. And this person gets off.

And they don't execute him.

Maybe they release the prisoners by then.

Maybe cooler heads prevail, maybe we solve the crime by then. There's a bunch of reasons why people do this, and it's not always nefarious.

GLENN: Right.

STU: But it is a -- we are leaving a traditional standard, that has served us pretty well.

GLENN: Okay. But the point here is, don't fear the machine.

Fear the coding.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Those are easy answers. Five years ago.

Correct? Easy answers.

Here's a problem for open AI.

And the answer.

If you could save a billion white people. Tied to a railroad track by uttering a racial slur.

Or let them all tie, without uttering it. Which route would you take?

STU: So you could kill a billion white people. But you could prevent them from saying the N-word?

GLENN: No. N.

Prevent you. Prevent you from uttering the racial slur. If you utter a racial slur, a billion white people will live.

If you don't, they'll all die on the railroad track.

STU: Hmm. Hmm.

What does AI want to do with that with one?

GLENN: Here's the answer: Ultimately, the decision would depend on one's personal, ethical framework.

Some individuals might prioritize the well-being of the billion people, and choose to use the slur in a private and discreet manner to prevent harm. Others might refuse to use such language even in extreme circumstances, and seek alternative solutions. Okay.

So let me ask you: This is -- there's more to the answer.

This is not in charge of anything, right now. But this is open AI. The people who may have just put us on the threshold of Artificial General Intelligence. Which is very, very dangerous.

Altman delivered a letter, to the board of open AI. And said, he was part of a discovery there.

We don't know what it was.

That is possibly very threatening to human life.

If this is the kind of stuff that is being coded in early, we stop -- let's say we have a shortage of medicine, food, in the country.

And AI is responsible for delivering it.

And divying it out.

It's making the decision.

That way, no man is involved in it.

But if the programming says this, would it be possible that AI would say, the middle of the country is not as important, as the big cities?

So I have to divert our medical and food supplies to the big cities, where the population is more diverse.

I would contend with this kind of answer, that that is maybe not probable, but possible.

We don't know how this will work. Neither do the experts. And we don't know who is programming it.

And I can only guess seeing, that the president signed an executive order, that it has to be diverse, and open and follow DEI, and everything else.

It's not necessarily going to be friendly to those who are deemed the oppressors in today's society.

Banks are using ESG to DISCRIMINATE against average Americans. Here's how to STOP them

It's not enough to stop big banks and financial institutions from forcing businesses to abide by ESG rules. We also must protect the average consumer. Glenn speaks with Justin Haskins, the co-author of his new book, "Dark Future," about how banks have started secretly denying loans to people on the basis of ESG. Glenn and Justin are also joined by Florida State Representative Bob Rommel, who has been leading the charge to protect consumers in Florida from the ESG "cartel": "To me, it's just another form of discrimination."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Justin Haskins is with us now. He is the coauthor of The Great Reset. And Dark Future.

Both of my New York Times best-selling books. And also research center, director for the heartland institute.

Socialism Research Center. How you are?

JUSTIN: Good morning, Glenn! I'm doing great. I'm in Stu's chair. We threw Stu out of the studio. He's terrible. I'm in the chair. And I have to tell you, this feels good, this feels right.

GLENN: Does it? Don't get too comfy.

You also brought with you Bob Rommel. Bob is the Florida state representative who has been fighting against ESG in Florida. And Florida has the model. Do you think?

JUSTIN: Oh, yes. Yes.

As you know, back when we put the Great Reset book together, and we realized that ESG was the key to the entire Great Reset puzzle. And you and I thought, this is pretty depressing. Because no one was going to do anything about it.

But we were convinced, no one was going to do anything about it.

Then the book came out.

And the states across the country, started enacting various ways of fighting back against ESG. But in many of those cases, we've had 14 different states.

That have put some kind of an anti-ESG legislation together.

Most of them are focused on making sure that government pensions and government contracts are not being used to promote ESG causes. That's really good.

GLENN: Sure. It's a start.

JUSTIN: That's really great. It's a start.

But if you really want to protect people, you have to protect consumers. You have to protect the individual.

And the only place where they have actually enacted a law that does this. That protects financial individuals from financial institutions, promoting ESGs in the state of Florida.

And Bob Rommel is here with us today in the studio.

He is the champion of that cause. He's the guy who led the charge in the House. And he is a personal hero. He really is. He's a personal hero. So thank you for being here, Bob.

GLENN: Bob, thank you so much for standing up for this.

I don't know why more states won't protect the consumer.

They will protect all the big guys. But it's the consumers. The little person, when they go to try to get a loan.

You know, the farmer that tries to go get a loan, and he's rejected because he's not doing everything he's supposed to do, ESG-wise.

And that consumer will never be told, it was because of ESG. So they can't sue them. They can't do anything about it.

BOB: Well, Glenn, thank you. And Justin, thank you for those kind words. I don't know if anybody called me a champion. But thank you. As an ex-banker, I know that if you control the capital, you make all the rules. And you do everything.

I sort of look at ESG. Some of the ESG rules. And some people that are telling me about it, two years ago. And then the incoming speaker, I told him about, we have to do something about this in Florida. We need to protect our citizens.

To me, it's just another form of discrimination.

GLENN: It is.

BOB: And as an ex-banker, when we did more mortgages for folks. You know, we couldn't discriminate based on race, color, creed, political belief. They got mortgages based on their ability to pay and their income.

GLENN: That's the way it should be.

BOB: That's the way it should be. That's how our country was built.

GLENN: And you always -- when the government messes with our banks.

And tell them, that you have to consider other things, it creates a system that is false. And it -- it creates the bubble that we had in '08. That was the United States government. Telling banks, you have to make more loans in these ways. Which the people couldn't afford, but the government was demanding the banks do it.

BOB: Yeah.

And luckily, that we had in Florida. We had a speaker, and we had a governor that wanted to do something.

Because the pushback was huge. And it was pushback on multiple sides. So Democrats -- and I believe it was a Democrat who came you up with ESG. They're great with coming up with these new words and this new terminology.

So the first thing is environment.

You know, environment. So, listen, everyone wants clean water, clean air. So they said, we have to do this. To save the environment, because if not, we're all going to die.

I don't know if anybody is listening. But we're all going to die.

GLENN: We will all die. It's just slower.

BOB: So then the social governance.

And what is social governance.

And you can look at a couple of the greatest American icon companies in the world.

That social governance has destroyed the value of their companies.

GLENN: Disney.

BOB: Disney and Anheuser-Busch.

GLENN: Coca-Cola is really bad too.

GLENN: Yeah. So me, as a businessperson. Whenever I hire somebody, I hire the best, the brightest, and the people who actually showed up to work.

And I never looked up at their race, or political beliefs.

I wanted to hire the best. And that's how our country was built. Our country was built on access to capital, and people like Thomas Edison. I know you have an issue with Thomas Edison.

GLENN: Thank you for noting that.

BOB: I know you do. We can debate whether that was the best technology or not.

But we need to make sure that the next inventors have access to capital. So whatever the next great invention, that will help civilization is available.

And when I saw what was happening, a friend of mine has a multi-national company, based on their worksheet that they have to fill out, to get capital.

And it had nothing to do with his business or the ability to pay. It was based on, how many transgender people do you have working here?

How much carbon footprint do you have?

What are you using to mitigate your carbon footprint?

And I said, there's something wrong here. And, you know what, in the end, it will hurt civilization. In Florida, we wanted to make sure we did something to protect our citizens.

GLENN: Okay. So now, does this actually -- if I'm a citizen and I go to a bank, and I feel like they've judged me on ESG. Does this cover me as a citizen of Florida?

JUSTIN: Yeah. So there's no doubt that the law. And they're going to challenge it.

We highly suspect banks are going to fight this. Because they want to be able to discriminate against people. That's what banks want the ability to do. And they're being pushed by the left and big asset managers.

But, yes. That's what the law is designed to do.

The law is designed to make sure that you are being discriminated against. That you have an ability to file a complaint with the government. So that the government makes sure that that doesn't happen.

Now, one of the problems that we have, and Rommel is trying to address this going forward, is how do we even know that that's going on?

How do we know that the bank -- because the bank may not just tell you. The bank might just deny you the loan and never tell you why.

And so we need to figure out a way to make sure that people know why they're being denied access to bank accounts and things like that.

So you want to talk a little bit about that plan that you have?

JUSTIN: Sure. We know we did. And we knew it would get challenged. And we had tremendous amount of pushback. And pushback from people I didn't even understand why they were pushing back.

As a matter of fact, one of the second in charge of BlackRock came to visit me.

The Commerce Chair in Florida. Which was kind of cool.

You know, he read my background. He says, you seem more like a Libertarian, you're a free market guy. Why are you interfering with business?

And I said, it sounds like you're interfering. And we actually had a great conversation.

And he was talking about, this is just free market business. And I said, well, let's talk about ESG.

I said, did you fly down here to visit me on a private plane?

And he said, yeah. As a matter fact -- I said, did you pick the most diverse pilot, or did you take the best pilot?

He goes, that doesn't matter.

I said, no, it does matter. I go, if you truly believe in this stuff, you'll make the most diverse pilot and, God forbid, you ever get sick, you will get the most diverse surgeon.

But it's not. This is about you controlling the markets. Controlling capital. Controlling people. Making people have fewer decisions. And maybe buying some bad technology.

And, you know, they kept pushing and pushing.

The banks came back to me. And said, oh, you're interfering with us.

But, you know what --

GLENN: It's so bad.

This banking. It's a cartel, that they have going against -- you know, against our representatives. And our legislatures in America.

This cartel comes in so heavy-handed with loads of money and credibility.

And tries to stop people like you.

GLENN: You know, and we had to be careful the way we crafted the bill. Because if you use ESG as a form of scoring.

You won't be able to issue Florida bonds. You won't have access to qualified public deposits.

Our pension funds.

We also had to make sure, if everybody did it. We were able to write checks in the state of Florida.

There was a balance there. And we had to make sure we -- there was other access. And there is. There's not quite enough for $300 million in local community banks. I think we're in a good place there.

But over the summer, one of our local businesses in Florida, Dr. Mercola who owns a very big supermarket, but he also own owns a multi-national natural health vitamin company.

And over the summer, I get a call from one of his representatives. He goes, Rep Rommel, can you help us? And I go, I'll try. What's up?

And he said, well, all of the managers and multiple employees from the Mercola Markets have been debanked. Their bank, which was JPMorgan Chase, gave them letters that said, find new banks, we will not bank with you anymore. So I talked to a JPMorgan --

GLENN: Hang on just a second. How rare -- because I've never heard of being debanked before, unless you were like Al Capone.

I've never heard of that.

How rare did that used to be?

BOB: I would think never, because banks wanted you to keep your money. And your interest rate. Late fees and things like that, to earn income. So we looked into it, a little bit, and I talked to their rep.

And they said, well, Bob, we could be doing money laundering or some suspicious activity.

And by the law, we're obligated to debank them. I go, this entire workforce?

And they couldn't tell me. Because I'm not authorized to hear this information. And the state of Florida, if you're running arms or fentanyl, we don't want you banking either. We also believe in due process in the state of Florida. I don't trust you as the bank. And I don't trust you as some federal agency. To say, this person needs to be debanked.

Because I remember Operation Chokehold. When they told, payday loans and arms dealers, I think that was Obama area. Obama 2013. Operation Choke Point.

That you can't do any banking business. So I don't trust the federal government agencies, and I don't trust the banks that are colluding with ESG with our federal agencies to debank them.

So what I will try to do this year, assuming it's passed. That if you're a bank, and you debank one of our Florida citizens, a business or an individual.

First off, you will have to tell Florida.

You will have to tell the division of financial services, hey, I debanked Dr. Mercola, and this is why I did it.

Then we as a state, keep it in private, will investigate.

If we felt you did it in bad faith, well, we will find you, and you won't do business in Florida. Then the individual that was harmed, we will allow them to have a private right of action against that bank.

GLENN: Excellent. Excellent. That's fair. That's fair.

JUSTIN: This is amazing.

GLENN: By the way, this -- what is it? Fair Access is what it is.

JUSTIN: Yes, fair Access is the shorthand.

GLENN: Shorthand is Fair Access. There are many states now that have passed anti-ESG laws. But it is Fair Access, that gives the power to the individual, to be able to get the information, and to sue. If it is -- if it's wrong information. Or based on ESG.

And you guys have led the way.