RADIONovember 18, 2022

Did the US just get closer to the Russia, Ukraine war?

The world held its breathe this week when a stray missile crossed into Poland — a NATO country. Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy insisted the missile came from Russia, but other reports claim the opposite. Either way, with a NATO country now directly effected, did the U.S. become close to entering the war? Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT), joins Glenn to explain if America was ever close to joining the danger. Plus, Rep. Stewart explains why it wouldn’t make any sense for Vladimir Putin to involve NATO forces right now.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Chris Stewart is a multiple New York Times best-selling author. He is one of the best writers out there. He's a national award-winning author. Also, world record setting Air Force pilot, and the former owner and CEO of a small business. And he is a friend of mine. He is the congressman from Utah's second congressional district. Chris Stewart, welcome to the program.

CHRIS: Hey, Glenn. Nice to see you say, I was a friend of yours. That's great. Thank you.

GLENN: I know. And I expect that check to clear.

Now, listen, here's the thing I want you to talk about. Because you were on the intelligence and the permanent select committee, and you have military background. What the heck happened this week? How close were we to a war with Russia?

CHRIS: Okay. So like often when we speak, Glenn, I have to be careful what I say to you. And I want to speak you know in the realm of information that is publicly available. And there's more than that. It just passes the common sense test. Anyone with average intelligence would be able to conclude, and that is it was very, very dicey in the last ten days or so.

Because one of the most intricate, complicated, and dangerous maneuvers any military force can endeavor to do is an orderly withdrawal.

It's inherently dangerous in the sense, you're weakening your forces as you're trying to hold territory, while the others lead, the -- the area of operations. The fact that you have the river there, which obviously complicates that.

And Vladimir Putin has I think, we conclude there's -- you know there are certain thresholds, that he will not allow to have happen.

One of them is any essential Russian strategic defeat -- one of the results will protect his forces from the humiliating defeat that would alter the outcome of the war, and that's what we were facing this week.

And the good news, ironically, the good news is Russia actually had a very well executed withdrawal, that did not endanger massive numbers to our forces. So Vladimir Putin wasn't faced with that choice.

But it was very, very content, and a moment of uncertainty there, that I think we had our eyes -- our eyes were on it, very carefully.

GLENN: I will tell you, that when I saw the news. Someone came into a studio. I was in between shows. Somebody walked in and said, a missile just landed in Poland. And I said, oh, my gosh.

And we hoped that it was a mistake. And it was a mistake on Ukrainian's side. But Zelinsky is still saying, we don't have the proof that it was us. I mean, is that even possible that he doesn't know?

CHRIS: No. He often says things he has to say, in order to achieve his goals. And you go back to even before the war, he continued to deny, this was ever going to happen. Despite the clear evidence, that it wasn't just possible, it was inevitable. And he had to do that to keep on a brave face for his people. Et cetera. And one of the things we're seeing now, him saying to his people, and his military. You know, we're going to keep going. We're going to defeat every Russian. We're going to chase him out of every region, and Dinesh, Eastern regions of Ukraine, and maybe even Crimea.

So he will say things to rally his people. And rally his military forces. And I think this is an example of that.

Going back to where I started, you apply a common sense test. Becoming increasingly difficult, as we know in the world around us. Because we see that things make no sense at all, and it turns out to be true.

But Vladimir Putin does not want to go to war with NATO right now. I mean, he's in the middle of a catastrophe anyway. And to bring NATO into a war, especially on the western front, around could he have. It would just take a catastrophe, and times it by 100 for him. And not just militarily, but the perception of the world.

So one of the first things you ask yourself. It doesn't make sense. Why would Vladimir Putin do that? And it turns out, he didn't. It turns out, it was almost certainly a Ukrainian missile. And it took us very little time to determine, that it was fired by Ukrainians. It was likely a Russian missile. But it was one provided previous to the war.

And so that's why I think there were some confusion. Again, it just didn't make sense. It turned out not to be true. That Vladimir Putin was actually attacking a NATO country.

GLENN: What do you think of Milley this week saying, we're just going to keep giving them the money?

CHRIS: I don't think Milley is a member of Congress. So Milley doesn't make that decision, does he?

GLENN: Do you think there will be enough of you that will fight for an actual budget and appropriations?

CHRIS: Depends on what you mean by as number of us, as sufficient enough to stop it, I don't know yet. But there's a growing number of us, including those of us with military backgrounds. Those of us who sit on the intelligence in the Armed Services Committee, who will lead on these issues, who have increasing concerns about this.

And I think, Glenn, you and I talked about, an editorial I talked about several months ago. Or several weeks ago. That said, look, have we learned nothing from Iraq or Afghanistan. And if we have learned some of those lessons, we need to apply them here. And the very first thing we need to know, are our goals and Zelinsky's aligned? Because if he says, and he actually means, we're going to continue and press this all the way into Crimea. The United States simply cannot support that goal, without finding ourselves at war with Russia. And offensive operations in Crimea. Vladimir Putin would do that no differently than if we were to attack Moscow.

And Zelinsky certainly knows that. And so we have to first clarify this question.

What are our goals in Ukraine? And if we can agree on those goals, then we will support the effort.

Then second thing, you mentioned, Glenn, where is this money going?

Do we know these weapons are going where they're supposed to be going? By the way, are we funding nonessential military operations, like Ukrainian. The retirement accounts for Ukrainian officials.

I mean, that has simply got to stop as well. We have to identify where this money, and how this money is being spent.

GLENN: Let me switch topics.

The Republicans have laid out the Biden investigation. They were very clear. This is not about Hunter Biden. This is about Joe Biden.

The evidence seems to be overwhelming. You can't -- you can impeach. But you won't -- you won't get the Congress to you know vote for impeachment in the Senate.

And convict him of that. Most likely.

What is -- what do you think is happening here? How is this going to be perceived?

For the first time, Brock, what's his name? David Brock is leaving Media Matters, and he's going into a new Shell company that is going to be coordinating the pushback on the Republicans.

They are -- they are marshaling their forces like crazy. Like only Democrats do. What do you think is coming?

CHRIS: Well, they're marshaling their forces, because they know a catastrophe is coming. And that is, the truth is finally going to be revealed. And it will be revealed in such a way, that it can't be ignored.

You know, Glenn as effective as people like yourself are, in announcing and stating whether it's obviously true, it doesn't have the same weight as when an official committee of Congress, reaches certain conclusions.

It's harder for the media to ignore that. This isn't just about some business dealings with big companies in Ukraine and China.

Of course, China is our primary focus.

These are actual evidence of fraud. There's actual evidence of conspiracy. And with companies that are directly tied to the communist leadership, and Communist Party, in China.

And -- and we're finally going to have a chance, to investigate in that subpoena, and to understand these allegations. There's one thing I would caution. And I actually -- I -- I have a conclusion, that might surprise you. We should caution ourselves, in the sense, we won't necessarily impeach.

What we should say is, we'll investigate and find the truth.

And then if that truth compels, we should proceed with that.

GLENN: I agree.

CHRIS: I think the evidence of this is potentially so overwhelming. That I don't think it's possible, that the Senate doesn't actually convict.

I think it's possible, that the evidence is so overwhelming. That they may have no choice.

Now, again, let's see. Let's do the investigation. And let's see where we are.

But I think it's -- this is opening up a can of words. This is something way more substantial for the administration. Than just an inconvenience for them.

GLENN: Chris, I don't know if you know, anything about this happen.

I haven't looked into it. I haven't had time yet today. The Klamath River. They are getting rid of the four dams, on the Klamath River for the salmon. This is not the same river.
This is Washington, Oregon, California.

This is not the four dams. That they wanted to get rid of, on the Snake River. Right?

I didn't know we were trying to get rid of eight dams. I just know we were trying to get rid of four, apparently.

Do you know anything about the Klamath River Dam?

CHRIS: Well, I know a little bit. I don't know if I know enough to go into national radio.

GLENN: All right.

CHRIS: I will say this though, what you indicated is true. And also, it shows, just the insanity of the radical environmentalists who are in the middle of a drought, in the entire western United States. They think the solution is to drain the dams. They're trying to do the same thing here in Utah with the lake -- it just literally makes no sense in the middle of a drought. When water is precious, anyway, in a region where you know wars are fought over water, as the old saying goes. Yeah. Let's go drain dams. Because we know that will help. Again, it just simply makes no sense.

GLENN: Real quick, the EPA has held up major oil refinery, during the oil crisis. They're -- you know they're shutting everything down.

And they're not letting us redesign or rebuild or anything. According to the EPA.

Can Congress actually get anything done to actually relieve the American people of some of this nonsense, by themselves?

RICHARD: Well, I think there's only one avenue to do that. And that's through the appropriations process. Which you mentioned I sit on the house committee. I also sit on the Appropriations Committee.

And there's good news and bad news there. We can compel some of these things by tying it to government funding.

The bad news is, it's only a one-year solution. It's not a permanent solution. Because it's tied to language, which only funds the government for that year. So that's as long as language can apply.

And the second thing is that you run the risk of having, either the Senate or the president, veto or reject that funding mechanism, because of some of that language. And then you have to fight through the government checkout. So we're going to have some victory on those things, Glenn.

We will be able to insert language, whether it's with the EPA.

Another example, defunding 87,000 IRS agents.

I think that's one of the very first things we're going to take on. But we're going to do it through defunding again, through appropriations. And I challenge the president to shut down the government because he wants to adjust by having 87,000 IRS agents, who are going to come after any small business owner.

You don't need 87,000 agents to go after Jeff Bezos. That's clearly looking at middle-class Americans. Middle income Americans. And business owners.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

CHRIS: So I think we could have some success. I think we will have some success on some of the EPA and oil and gas businesses. The absurdity of the president shutting down domestic oil production. And then turning to the oil and gas producers, and blaming them, and talking about their greed over the price of gas. I mean, does he gaslight the American people, to the extent that he just assumes every one of them is stupid?

We know what's happened here. And I think we will have a little bit of success on that, but the challenge is you have Schumer still running the Senate. We have to work our language through him.

GLENN: I know. All right. Chris, thank you for everything you do.

Congressman Chris Stewart, and have a great Thanksgiving, sir. God bless.

CHRIS: Thank you, sir. You too.

GLENN: You bet.

AI military drone maker reveals the FUTURE of warfare

The next war will look VERY different, now that we have AI. Glenn speaks with Brandon Tseng, co-founder and president of Shield AI, a company making AI-powered drones and autonomous planes for the US Military. Brandon discusses his drone planes like the X-BAT, and also gives his take on new foreign weapons, like Putin’s new nuclear-powered cruise missile: "It sounds dumb."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: The cofounder and president of Shield AI, Brandon Tseng is with us. He's a former Navy SEAL. How old are you? You look like you're 14. How old are you?

BRANDON: I'm 39.

GLENN: Thirty-nine. Anyway, you have -- you are making a huge the difference in the AI world, especially with defense. Especially well the expat. A new plane. Do you call them drones, or are they planes?

BRANDON: Expats are a vertical takeoff launch and land AI-piloted fighter jet. Sometimes when people think drones, they just think quad copters. Except, there's a whole world of drones.

GLENN: It's weird. You either think of the quad copters, or you just think of those gigantic gray drones.

BRANDON: Yeah. The Predators and Reapers, yeah.

GLENN: And we're not like that anymore, either. Right? Have we updated those?

BRANDON: No. So Shield AI builds a miniature version of said drone. That's also vertical takeoff launch and land. It's called the Vbat, weighs about 180 pounds. But it's meant to do the mission of these $40 million drones for a fraction of the cost. And so we've been using that with US forces, oh, man. Now, probably since 2019, but most recently, we've been working with the US Coast Guard. We've interdicted billions of drugs in the Caribbean. So you just set a record with the US Coast Guard, interdicting 20 tons --

GLENN: Are you blowing up the boats, or are you just --

BRANDON: Shield AI is not blowing up any boats. But, yeah, the Coast Guard is setting them on fire after the whole thing is said and done.

GLENN: Wow. So -- so let me -- let me go into the -- the future of warfare.

Because it -- it's a little freaky. And I don't even know. There's a story that just came out today. Because we're negotiating with Russia.

And Russia is always beating their chest. And they have something new.

This one, just sounds crazy. CNN, this morning. Putin claimed successful test of long range nuclear-powered cruise missile, amid diplomatic breakdown. And what this cruise missile is, you launch it. It's not just nuclear-tipped. It's nuclear-powered as well.

So the idea is, it would just stay up in space. And it will just stay up there until it's directed to hit something. Which I guess, you not only blow a city up.

But you also have the China syndrome happening at the same time. I don't even get it. What do you think of this weapon?

BRANDON: Yeah. It sounds crazy. It sounds dumb. It sounds overengineered. I mean, it actually reminds me of some of the things the US was doing in the '50s. I don't know if you know this. We had something called the Davey Crockett nuclear rocket. Which was a hand-held nuclear rocket launcher. They said, only a Navy rocket would be crazy enough to shoot this thing. Because you're firing a nuclear bomb over your shoulder. And you hope it goes far enough.

That's --

GLENN: 1950s were kind of scary.

BRANDON: Yeah. You can Wikipedia this stuff. It's in there. Kind of scary. Right with the nuclear-powered cruise missile. Fifteen hours. Like, okay. Now, why do you need it to be up in the air for 15 hours?

You're seeing where this thing is. It becomes an easier target for people to shoot down. And then to the point, now, what do you have if this thing actually blows up, at any point, whether we take it out, or they take it out. Now you have nuclear material over some area?

Like, again, something I could see. Some crazy scientist and engineers working on, something that I believe has near zero utility on the battlefield in any -- like, even -- even by the Russians.

GLENN: What about the hypersonic missiles now?

BRANDON: Yeah, no, the hypersonics are -- look, what I'm a big proponent of is first principles of warfare. So like mass, maneuver, speed is another principle of warfare. And so what the hypersonics are getting after is that first principle of the speed.

It's like, look, if you can hit your targets faster than they can react. There's something to do that. In that range, at that standoff, at that offset, that is something that is pretty interesting. Now, the challenge that the United States has had. Has been around to getting these to a feasible level.

And I know there's some efforts to bring down the cost of hypersonics. But it's also what makes it incredibly difficult, is when you start to go hypersonic. You know, multiple interdicts of Mach 1.0, to Mach 2, 3, 4. That is a hard, hard, hard, hard physics problem.

GLENN: Right.

You know, I've always felt like, whenever we saw something, you know, when you -- when you first saw the stealth bomber, we were probably on the second iteration. You know what I mean?

We were always -- we didn't always just show what we had.

Is that true anymore?

Do we have things that the world doesn't know, that --

BRANDON: I don't think we have too many things that the world doesn't know about.

Certainly, there are classified programs.

And I think the US does have a couple -- not technologies. You know, up its -- its sleeve. Just like, you know, concepts. Operating concepts.

Is what I would say. We still are like pretty good at.

And so what you're seeing today is in the military world.

You see a lot in the -- you know, just the consumer software world. Where industry is really leading, in this day and age.

So you see industry leading the customer, more than what I would say in the past, right?

In the '80s. '90s. Early 2000s. You would seat customer leading industry to what --

GLENN: We want to do this.

BRANDON: Yeah. Exactly.

GLENN: Are we -- are you concerned at all, with -- with AI and technology being so readily available, and cheap?

You know, everywhere.

That everybody can -- can do some really bad damage. You know, you don't have to be a -- you don't have to be the United States of America.

BRANDON: Yeah. Look, I think every new technology is a double-edged sword. It can produce a ton of value for the world. It can do a lot of value for the world. And at the same time, we put that technology into the wrong person's hands, it can do damage to the world. And so I think the same was true of the internet.

The same is true of now providing compute power into massive amount of compute power into someone's hand, just via an IPhone or an android phone. And so I don't look at AI -- like, I don't worry about AI and autonomy.

And I think it's wrong to prohibit the advancement of a technology, simply because, you know, some wrong can be done with it.

GLENN: Right.

BRANDON: There's a ton of things, where a lot of wrong, we've seen this.

A lot of things can be weaponized. Whether it's an airplane. Whether it's a car. Whether it's the internet. You name it.

But these technologies aren't bad for the sake of being a new technology.

GLENN: Yeah.

I've talked to the president about this several times. The one thing that freaks him out, keeps him up at night is nuclear world. He said, I rebuilt the nuclear arsenal. And he said, you don't even want to understand what we can do. He's like, it's -- it's always been bad. He said, it's -- it's colossally bad. And once it starts, it's over.

And he's really -- he does, I think -- what little sleep he does get, I think there are times where he has lost sleep over war on nuclear, with nuclear weapons.

Is there any of this new technology, is there anything about AI or any of this stuff that freaks you out, that you think, this is really scary, if it -- if it goes wrong or whatever?

BRANDON: Yeah. The way I think about it is, look, nuclear deterrence, has deterred nuclear war since we -- since 1945.

GLENN: Yes. Right. Yeah.

BRANDON: And that largely stopped world wars for the past 80-plus years.

GLENN: Right.

BRANDON: And so our conventional deterrence has been dominated by our aircraft carriers and our submarines in terms of how we deter large state-on-state conflicts in this day and age. It's with these -- along with the number of other, you know, levers that we pull. Economic levers. Diplomacy levers. But the military lever has been dominated by our aircraft carriers, our air power, and our submarines.

GLENN: Sure.

BRANDON: So where I see the world going. It's like AI and autonomy is enabling this next generation of deterrence. Because our legacy weapons systems, they're not as well-respected. Our aircraft carriers are not as respected as they once were. Right?

GLENN: I'm a sitting duck.

BRANDON: Yeah, when the enemy has antiship missiles that outrange what these carriers can launch with our jets.

And they have surface-to-air missile systems that can target any fuel tanker, like, that's when you see your conventional deterrence capabilities start to erode.

AI and autonomy is that massive unlock for the military, for our allies.

It enables, you know, the United States to feel millions of drones. You can't feel millions of drone pilots.

We don't have enough people.

Aren't enough people signing up.

What you can do is enable small groups of people to feel these drone swarms that I believe will be the most strategic conventional deterrence for the next 25 years. And again, that's why I started Shield AI. We have the tag line. The greatest victory requires no war.

It is about having such a dominant military that any adversary thinks twice before starting, either a straightforward conflict or an asymmetric one.

GLENN: Are you concerned about -- you know, Elon Musk says. And I don't know how true this is.

But Elon Musk says we are the new Grok.
I think it's five or six that is coming. Is 60 percent close to AGI. Are you concerned about AGI and ASI? And what that might mean?

BRANDON: I'm not concerned about AGI, but I'm an eternal optimist. And so I put that disclaimer out there. It's really hard to say what 60 percent of AGI means.

GLENN: Right.

BRANDON: What I do think is really interesting, really fascinating.

It's now what is possible in this day and age with AI and autonomy. And I'll share something cool that I looked up the other day, and why I'm an optimist around it.

I asked Grok 4, I said, "What was the economic impact of the internet from 2000 to 2025 on global GDP by a cumulative basis?" Its estimate was 134 trillion dollars' worth of economic value, attributed to that core underlying technology, being the internet.

A ton of value created for the world. I then asked it, what is the value of AI and autonomy going to be for the world from 2025 to 2050, estimated that. It's estimate -- maybe it's biased if it's AI estimating itself.

Was -- yeah. Yeah. Four and a half quadrillion dollars, forty times bigger than the internet. And so that world. Again, I'm a techno optimist. I get excited about that.

It's hard to really understand or fathom what that world looks like, but I think it's going to be a net positive for the world in a way that so many underlying core technologies of life have been.

Now, it doesn't mean that there's -- it's all sunshine and -- and rainbows. There's going to be some bad actors out there with it for sure.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. So last question, I hate to ask you this. But I have to ask you this: Being a guy who is in into drones, everything else. What we saw last year over New Jersey, what the hell was that?

BRANDON: I -- I don't understand know what it was in New Jersey.

But I don't like the idea that there was anybody able to fly drones at all.

GLENN: Yeah. Those were large too.

BRANDON: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I don't know if it was another state.

I don't know if people were pulling pranks. Like they've done in the past. I don't know what it was.

GLENN: But do you think it could have been us?

BRANDON: No. I think it was someone else. Is what I think it was.

GLENN: That's a little frightening.

BRANDON: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I don't know what it was though. So, yeah.

GLENN: Have you ruled out extraterrestrial.

BRANDON: I probably haven't paid enough attention to it. But, yeah. I don't know what it was.

GLENN: That's a little frightening. Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

We'll be watching.

You bet.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

He Hunted SATANIST Mexican Cartels and SURVIVED | Dave Franke | The Glenn Beck Podcast | Ep 272

Dave Franke stared down the cartel in Mexico’s blood-soaked Zacatecas — and lived. Now he tells Glenn the unfiltered truth: The cartels are “absolutely” operating inside the United States. Through raw, firsthand accounts, he rips the veil off the narco-satanic cult of Santa Muerte — the Saint of Death — and the savage brutality it fuels. Trump calls the cartels “the ISIS of the Western hemisphere,” and his Homeland Security Task Force has already seized thousands of terrorists and cartel operatives, two million fentanyl pills, and 70 tons of narcotics. But Dave warns: We’ve barely “scratched the surface.” Facing entrenched corruption, human trafficking, and a highly profitable drug trade, Glenn and Dave debate a radical fix — legalize drugs — and ask the explosive question: Does our government let the cartels thrive in exchange for intel, just like in "Ozark"? It’s the story that neither Fox nor CNN would let Glenn tell finally coming to the light, but is it already too late?

I asked Vance and Rubio about 2028. They told me the SAME THING...

Will Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio team up for a 2028 presidential run? Glenn Beck asked them both, separately, and shockingly, they gave him the SAME answer. Glenn reveals what they said, as well as what they said about President Trump...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Blaze.com has a news story out: J.D. Vance responds to the possibility of a Vance/Rubio presidential ticket. Responds to a --
I -- I love his response. He was speaking on Pod Force One. It's a podcast from the New York Post. And they asked him about, you know, how do you feel about a Vance/Rubio ticket?

And he said, it -- well, you know, we get along really, really well. The reason why we're successful, is because all of us work together really well.

STU: Which is not necessarily the case of the first term. You cannot say that about the people working in the White House.

GLENN: No. And most. Most.

I mean, I was saying this to a friend of mine, we were talking. And he asked me about a Vance/Rubio ticket. And I said, I talked to J.D. Vance and Rubio in the hallways of the White House. Just recently.

And about that. And I said, and they both said exactly the same thing.

Let's get through the next three and a half years. Things could change quickly in the next three and a half years.

STU: It's true.

There is a feeling I think on the right. That there's a lot of exciting things happening. Many of them positive.

GLENN: Three and a half years say long way.

STU: We are a long ways away. We are a long way away from the midterm elections.

I mean, think about this. We are what know.

We are -- to this point, closer to Trump's inauguration, than we are to the midterms.

GLENN: To the midterms.

STU: That seems impossible!

GLENN: I know. Impossible.

STU: In my head. But that's true to this moment.

GLENN: It's true. So it's crazy how much could change in the next four years, let alone the next one year.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: And things are going really, really well.

STU: That's for us. I know you're moving on to something else. The left hates this more than they've hated anything ever. Every person I've known on the left has been driven completely insane by this.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. By all of this, or by all of the leadership. Of the other side?

I mean, what -- what is really driving them insane

STU: They're totally driven by Trump. I'm not revealing anything new here. I think it's more extreme now, than it was in the first term.

GLENN: It is. But it's not -- they're not driven insane by Donald Trump.

I mean, Donald Trump does -- he does help them along, because he likes toying with them.

STU: Sure. Sure.

GLENN: So that doesn't help.

However, it is -- the response from the media. And the response from the Democrats that have made him into Hitler.

Not Donald Trump.

STU: No. I mean, their analysis of Donald Trump is that he's the worst human being of all time. I think that's helped along by leadership. Helped along by the media.

GLENN: They would elect Pol Pot over Donald Trump.

At this point.

STU: Pol Pot implemented a lot of policies that they liked.

GLENN: That's true. That's true. We should all be against the killing fields. But at this point, I'm not sure they would be against the killing fields.

STU: I don't know if the Hamas wing of the democratic party is against the killing fields.

I'm not sure about that. But I will say, if you look at overall. You look at approval ratings of Donald Trump. They're not at their highest point right now. That's not just Democrats.

That's the entire country.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: So if that were to continue, if a couple things go wrong, if the economy turns down.

We talked a lot about the economy being at risk, especially outside of the AI bubble.

I was reading something yesterday about, you know, the AI situation. It's funny. It's basically giving us all of these gains. It's almost all AI-related. All these -- we talked to experts about this. It's almost all a bunch of money being passed in between like seven companies.

And at the end of the day, let's just say that were to collapse. It would hurt our economy. And who knows where we would be.

GLENN: Even if it doesn't collapse, think of all the jobs that are probably going to be lost in the next three years. We're starting to see jobs lost because of AI now. It's going to become very, very unpopular.

And AI I think is going to become very, very unpopular. And those who, you know, are using AI. This is getting very dicey for me. I'm starting to regret everything that I've done in the last two years.

But it's going to become very, very unpopular, because it will take jobs. If companies decide to use it as people, and not as a tool for people. But, anyway, let's -- let's move on.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: The one thing. The one thing that they said, that is the point I wanted to make on this was, and they say it in TheBlaze article.

A lot of the good work we've done is because we do it as an administration, and we're all able to work together. What both of them said to me, on separate occasions, when I said this was, I said to Rubio and to Vance. You are killing it!

You're just killing it right now. And they both said, no, no, no. Both of them separately. No, no, no, no. He's killing it. Pointing to the Oval Office, "He's killing it. We're just following what he is directing us to do."

And I'm like, "Yeah. But you're also doing a very effective job at doing that. I've seen presidents give orders. I saw Donald Trump trying to give orders last time. And it didn't work out well."

And he's like, "No. We're a great, great team."

STU: That's good to hear.

GLENN: Yeah, but what I wanted to say was, I can't think of a time in my lifetime, I mean, I was not around the White House of the Reagan years. So I don't know. But I can't think of a time where I have seen honest credit, given by the top leadership in hallway conversations, to the president.

You know what I mean?

It was -- because it was honest. It was real. It wasn't like, you know. Oh, no.

It's not me. It's him. It was real.

No, no, no. You don't understand. His grand strategy amazing.

And we're just following it.

You know, that told me a lot.

A lot.

And told me a lot about the quality of people around him.

STU: And to be honest about it. It's also the right answer.

You didn't get the sense that they -- they are saying the thing they know is going to keep them in the good graces.

GLENN: No, I didn't. I didn't.

STU: That's good. That's really good.

GLENN: Yeah, I don't think either of those guys would have said -- they would have said thank you. It wasn't like that. It wasn't like that. It was no, no, no, no. You don't understand. He is running the show.

STU: I think the Venezuela boat situation is an interesting highlight of this.

Again, we've talked about all the questions about it. There's some stuff to discuss.

However, like, that is something that is super important, to Marco Rubio. Like, that is -- I would say, central to his -- that entire situation is very central to his belief system.

And his --

GLENN: Yes. Freeing the people of Venezuela.

STU: Really important to him. And the fact that Trump really takes that seriously. And is doing something about it, is really important to Rubio. I think it's --

GLENN: But I don't think -- see, that's the way I think most administrations would look at it, like I want to help Rubio out. I know you're really passionate about this. Let me do this. And I agree with you. But I really think, it's the other way around. I think Donald Trump is like, here's why this is important.

STU: Oh, I think --

GLENN: And it's a little bit with Rubio, what you're dealing with, what you're thinking. Let me show you the grand strategy of how it has to happen. And I think the big, big vision is coming from Donald Trump.

And it accomplishes everything that everybody else is looking to do. But it's much bigger vision.

The big vision is coming from him, I think.

STU: Yeah. I think, the other thing that is very central to Donald Trump belief system. Besides the idea that he doesn't want people coming across the border illegally. He's very against illegal subs. Not just a crime, that is associated with them.

But he's like, obviously, been really hard against that -- his entire life.

GLENN: No. I think -- I mean, I think -- I mean, you wouldn't do this, because of the Constitution.

But I think if he could, I think you would be like, yeah. Drug dealers. Execute.

STU: Well, he's kind of said that. What was the guy in the Philippines?

GLENN: Yeah, kind of like that. Look, he just kills them.

STU: And that's what some of the criticism is over the boats. Right?

Surprised to hear, there's not a lot of great trial attorneys involved in the process, when -- there's not defense being presented when -- when the drone is overhead. They believe these are threats. They believe they have this -- this -- that's going to go through the courts. It's going to be challenged.

GLENN: I know.

STU: And they will have to deal with that. But he is -- he is -- more importantly than stopping those drugs from coming in. Because you see the boats. You're like, well, what could that even do to our country? Swallowed up like -- that wouldn't even get through a Washington, DC, cocktail party, the amount of drugs they could carry on one of those boats.

GLENN: Well, if Hunter.

STU: If Hunter is there obviously.

GLENN: Or somebody else from the Biden administration.

STU: Right. Who knows who it could have been, with all the cocaine in the White House. But, I mean, the point there is, the message.

The message is quite clear what -- what they're sending to -- to Venezuela. Which is not just don't send boats. It is stop everything you're doing. By the way, did you notice that very large ship off your coast?

Like, we are sending all sorts of messages to them.

Much deeper than a please stop delivering some cocaine here.

GLENN: Do you think the fact that we sent one of our biggest bombers from North Dakota to just buzz the coastline. Just in the international waters.

STU: It's a beautiful coastline. Some sightseeing.

GLENN: Did you see this?

Two of our bombers from the air base in North Dakota ran what I would describe as -- and I think they want him to describe it in Venezuela, the same way. As a trial run!

Two times, now, we have sent two bombers. Big bombers. Right to the line of Venezuela. Right to international waters.

They flew all the way down from North Dakota. Down, made that run.

And then headed on home!

He is sending all -- the guy is brilliant.

He is sending all kinds of signals.

You guys should take care of him.

STU: What you know signal he's saying to me?

That he doesn't care about global warming. He see not care about the emissions from that plane.

GLENN: Hold on just a second.

Doesn't that feel good?

Why Trump’s currency swap could CRUSH China’s grip on South America

Why did President Trump recently do a currency swap with Argentina and make a deal for Argentinian beef imports? Financial expert Carol Roth joins Glenn to explain why she believes these deals are actually America First and in our national security interests. Plus, Carol and Glenn discuss the effects of Trump's tariffs and the government shutdown.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Carol, welcome to the program.

CAROL: Hi, Glenn. How are you?

GLENN: Good. Can you tell me what's going on in Argentina?

First of all, the currency swap. We didn't make a loan to Argentina. We made a currency swap. Which I'm not really -- I'm not really fond of the -- what is it? The piece zero. What is their currency down in Argentina?

CAROL: The Argentinian peso. You don't have a bunch of those in your vault with all your gold and silver?

GLENN: No. No. I don't. I don't.

But we do now, because we currency swapped, right? What's it mean?

CAROL: Yes, so this is -- this is not -- you know, just giving known Argentina for its government to spend. This is a financial support, which, by the way, currency swaps are not something that is unusual.

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: You know, we do this all the time with our allies, with Japan and Canada and what not. What is unusual in this particular situation, is how it's affected.

So basically, what happened is that we gave the Argentinian Central Bank dollars. We took as collateral the peso, and that is meant to support the Argentinian peso and help to stabilize this currency.

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: And a couple of things of note, one is how it was done is interesting. Because normally when we do currency swaps, and we have these lines, it's done through the Federal Reserve, or central bank.

This time, it was not. It was done through the Treasury, through something called the ESF. The Exchange Stabilization Fund, which is sort of a black box fund that allows Treasury to move quickly. You don't need Jay Powell. You don't need the approval of Congress in order to do these things.

GLENN: And that's what it was built for, to stabilize currency in friendly countries?

CAROL: And in the US, by the way,
because I can talk about the history and how we've used it in the US before. But just to kind of get to the Argentinian point. We did this, you know, before the election to help, you know, stabilize things for Milei, so that his government could win.

But we didn't do this because we think Milei is a good guy, or he has fabulous hair, even though we do think that.

The reason we did that is to secure our interests. Because you know who has been making a play in Argentina and throughout Latin America? You know who has had a long-term currency swap with Argentina. It's another country, I'll give you all a hint, and it rhymes with China. China's influence all around the world with their Belt and Road Initiatives where they're trying to dominate traditional infrastructure, digital infrastructure, financial infrastructure, we are trying to kick out their influence. For national security reasons. Also, it just so happens, that Argentina has the second largest reserve of lithium, as well as a smaller set of reserves of other rare-earth elements, that we need access to, for our economic and national security.

So that is what is underpinning all of this. It's because we don't want to be speaking mandarin one day.

GLENN: It's amazing how Donald Trump. People just don't understand this.

Everything he's doing in south marker, he's realigning the globe.

CAROL: Yes.

GLENN: He's doing -- he's doing his own version of America first, Great Reset, and he's just doing it by himself.

I mean, it's pretty incredible, isn't it? Carol?

It really is.

This is why, remember, when we first had the discussion by Scott Bessent.

And I eased everyone ever seen concerns.

Scott Bessent made his fortune on foreign currency exchange. There is nobody who understands the machinations of how you use currency to support countries, and also, you know, the impact on political influence. Like Scott Bessent.

So he has been side by side with President Trump. Who has said, you know. China's influence in South America is a national security issue.

It's a priority.

And, you know, at the time, when we're seeing a reset of the global financial order, and you had China making this very big play. At the same time, when we really have a serious issue with our fiscal foundation. At a minimum, we need to make sure that we have our hemisphere, locked down, before we can do anything else.

And China has really been focused on making inroads in Latin America, and that is what this is all about. And it's not just about the currency swap.

You talked about the importation of Argentina beef. That's a piece of it as well.

And we have to support US ranchers. We have to make it easier for them to do business. We have to remove regulation. This extra piece from Argentina, this is a long-term play. And I know that it's hard for people who are ranchers and who are dealing with this day to day. But this is a long-term play for national security. Because otherwise, it's not going to be Argentinians. It's going to be China that owns everything.

GLENN: Yeah. So I'm looking at Venezuela. What's happening there.

And I don't think that's about drug running. I mean, you know, it is about drug running. But it's not.

It's about, again, taking control of this hemisphere. True or false?

CAROL: Absolutely. And, I mean, this a -- this isn't even you or I guessing about this. This has been a stated goal of the Trump administration.

One of the great things about the Trump administration is Trump, whether he intends to or not. Is incredibly traps parent

He will tell you, what -- he will tell you the things he will do, even if they're couched, you know, in a different record. You can look through that record, and see what that candy is on the inside. And he told us about that candy. So he's been very clear, in addition to the commodities, and the -- the words, the elements, and all these things that are very plentiful in South America. We need to make sure that we have within our allies control so we can have access to.

You do not want China to have military relationships, and other very strong relationships. Within South America.

Because we know what that means long-term for the United States.

GLENN: How is Trump doing overall?

CAROL: So I think overall, I think he's doing quite well. I think from a foreign policy perspective, and I said this during the last administration. Think of him as a business guy. But from a foreign policy perspective, he's an absolutely just killing it. Crushing it. He's been doing a great job in terms of securing the borders. Obviously, we would like to see more deportations. But they're certainly trying and have some roadblocks. And I think from an economic standpoint, the fact that he has this long-term lens, even though some of the machinations I don't agree with, these are the important things. This is finally an administration who says, wait. Our military stockpile is at risk. Because we don't have the components and the supply chain to be able to make products.

We're dependent upon other products in other countries. And assuming they're going to sell us those products, so that we can be able to defend ourselves against them. That doesn't make any sense.

So finally, we have people who are addressing the long-term problems.

And I think the most important thing for a country right now subsidy that we have the runway.

Because we cannot, in three years. Or three and a half years, turn over the reins to another set of people, who want to undo all of this, who hate the United States. Who want to walk that back.

We need people like President Trump. Like the people he's developing. Who understand the long-term issues, that we face that have been built up over many years.

From this broken fiscal foundation. From both parties. But that's where we are today. And he is doing the hard work to try to fix that.

And it's not necessarily apparent to everyone who doesn't understand at this level. But it is so critical, for this very important reset that we're going to have.

GLENN: So I know that you're not a fan of tariffs. I'm not a fan of tariffs.

CAROL: Correct.

GLENN: However, the things that have been happening, the tariffs are not doing what everybody thought they would do.

Why is that?

CAROL: Well, I don't necessarily agree that they're not doing what people thought they would do.

I think that they're -- there has been a bit of overhype on how things are presented.

So do tariffs make it more expensive for businesses and consumers to buy certain goods and services? Yes.

And that has happened. And I've seen it with my own eyes. With my own company. In joy venture partners and small businesses across the country.

There are small businesses that have major burdens. These are the things we thought would happen. And they are happening. In terms of creating runaway inflation, I don't think anybody said that at the levels they are.

They said that when he kicked them up to 100 percent. Which he walked back.

GLENN: Right.

CAROL: But we also know when you look at inflation data. That the way that calculated. There's a lot of picking and choosing and substitutions. So, of course, when you say, oh, well, this particular product is being hit too much.

Some of it is substituted to this. Of course, it's not going to show up in the same way, as it affects people in their day-to-day lives. So, again, I think it's that nuanced understanding.

It's the same thing, you know, when people said, hey, why am I at the grocery store? And everything is 30 percent higher. And they're telling us that inflation under Biden is 4 percent. We know that has to do with the calculation.

So I think that tariffs are causing some issues. And some pain.

And hopefully, that can be sorted out in time.

But, you know, absent that particular strategy, I think other things that he's doing, on the American front, to shore up our security from an economic and national security standpoint, make a lot of sense.

STU: And, Carol, I think a lot of people lose sight. Just because it was such a big issue.

Look, trade is important.

But it's also not a huge part of our economy. Imported good news are about ten percent of our economy.

Does that number sound about right?

CAROL: You know, it's a small percent.

I would want to go back and verify the neighbor.

I have so many things rolling around in my head today. That's not top of mind.

But it's not a meaningful percent of our direct -- where does impact, there's a component, where it flows through the economy. And it affects domestic goods and services.

So even, if, you know, on a headline basis, it doesn't seem like it's that important, it can flow through the rest of the economy and create a drag and create some issues there.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: I want to take a break. And, Carol, I want to come back.

Carol Roth is the economist I trust. She's a former investment banker. And really has a clear eye, on not Wall Street. But on Main Street.

I want to talk to you about the shut down. We're about to see possible delays at our airport. Our air traffic controllers. SNAP is about to expire. What happens here. When his the average person begin to really feel the shutdown. And is there a -- is there a line where it just has gone too far.

GLENN: So, Carol, tell me where we are on the shutdown.

CAROL: Well, it's tough. And I think I've said to you before, Glenn. As somebody who would love to see many parts of the government be shut down permanently. There's part of me that goes, this is fantastic. And I hope it goes on forever.

GLENN: Me too.

CAROL: Obviously, there are people who -- you know, we want to make sure that we get paid. We want to make sure the military get paid. We want to make sure that air traffic controllers get paid. So there's a little bit of give and take. Probably the most surprising thing that has come to light is how many people are on food assistance in this country.

GLENN: Yes.

CAROL: When we have something that's supposed to be a safety net, it's almost in my mind, supposed to be like under the tightrope. The trampoline under the tightrope. You fall, and then it pushes you back up. And it's a temporary solution. I feel like we've turned that net into a hammock, where people are just taking a nap. And sleeping in it long-term. And, you know, that is something that even though devastating for the families who truly need to be on it. The fact that this is getting some light on it, I think, you know, that could be a small silver lining here. And I think that will put pressure on the Democratic base. The Democrats are holding out for a bunch of insanity, for illegals over trying to feed the people who are actually in their base. So I'm hoping that puts enough pressure for everybody else though. I think when this really starts to flow through the economy and becomes a drag on numbers and becomes a drag on the stock market, is where you're going to -- to see a little bit more --

GLENN: Any idea when that happens?

CAROL: It's hard to say. Because as we know right now, with the government shutdown. We're not even getting numbers.

GLENN: Right. Right. Right.

CAROL: But, you know, we cannot afford for GDP to contract. We cannot afford for the consumer, which is 70 percent of the economy.

To feel like they cannot spend. Because that flows through tax receipts. And if we have lower tax receipts. It will blow up the deficit. If we blow up the deficit, we can end up in a debt spiral. So that's the big issue here.

GLENN: Well, the food stamps. If you look the at the SNAP program through ethnicity. 45.6 percent of Afghans who have been imported here in America, are on food stamps. Forty-two percent of the Somali community. Thirty-four percent of the Iraqi community, and 23 percent of the Haitian community. That just can't happen!

That just can't happen.

CAROL: Yeah. You know, in terms of those numbers. I think there's a common sense approach that we need to take here. In terms of immigration.

Which I've raised the question with AI. You know, how much immigration do we actually need?

But to the extent that we do invite great people into our country, who share our values. We need to means test that, and you should not be allowed to come here and then be a dependent on the government.

That should be a position of coming to this country.

And I think that's something that seems like it would maybe a 20 or 90/10 issue. So, again, shining light on these things at the point of people who are actually willing to do the hard work and address this problem, is a net benefit.

Is a silver lining, even though the backdrop. You know, we don't want people who actually need this, to go without food.

But, you know, it brings into question, the system. You can get people beans. You can get people rice. You can get people staples. And have them be well-fed in a fraction of the cost, that it's currently costing. And keep out the dodos and the candies and the people who just arrived here to take advantage of the system.

GLENN: Yeah. Carol, thank you. As always, God bless.

CAROL: Always a pleasure.

GLENN: You bet. Buh-bye. Carol Roth. She is just -- I just love Carol. I looked for somebody like Carol for a long time, that understood Wall Street, understood the banking, and then also understood Main Street. CarolRoth.com.

You can find her at the website. Carol Roth. Or follow her on X @CarolJSRoth.