RADIOMarch 27, 2023

EXPLAINED: How the Fed’s FedNow program WILL end in a CBDC

The Federal Reserve’s new service for banks, called FedNow, promises increased flexibility, faster transactions, and instant payments with one, small cost: The potential END to your financial freedom. In this clip, Glenn is joined by Justin Haskins, co-author of their new book, ‘Dark Future.’ Haskins explains how — despite what the Federal Reserve may say — this new service is NOT an alternative to a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)…rather, it’s a giant stepping stone toward it. Watch Glenn tackle this topic further in his upcoming Glenn TV Wednesday Night Special, airing on YouTube and BlazeTV.com on March 29th.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Justin Haskins is with us. Justin is the -- he's with the socialism research center, at the Heartland Institute, where he is the director. He has been working tirelessly on stopping socialism.

He is also -- he was one of our main contributors to our Arguing With Socialists book.

He is also my coauthor of the book, The Great Reset. And our fourth coming book. We're all going to die.

I'm not sure exactly -- what did we name it, Justin?

That was my working title for quite some time.

JUSTIN: Are we telling people? Is this the first time?

GLENN: I don't know. Can we?

Check Amazon, see if it's up for sale.
If it's up for sale, we'll announce it. It's supposed to be in the next few days.

JUSTIN: The name of the book.

GLENN: Don't say it. Don't say it.

So, Justin, you wrote to me something kind of disturbing.

Last hour, I played these happy little commercials from the Federal Reserve about the Fed Now.

It's a new service for all of the banks, which will -- which will make the transfer of funds, you know, whether you're out shopping or you're a business owner, or you're doing bank-to-bank transactions.

You just run everything through the Federal Reserve, and it will happen fast. And I thought --

JUSTIN: Yeah. Isn't that exciting?

GLENN: Very exciting. Now, they're claiming that this is the alternative to a CBDC, which is a Central Bank Digital Currency.

It doesn't really sound so much like an alternative, as much as, I don't know, a system to run that on.

JUSTIN: Yeah. Basically, this is -- this is like Jason Buttrill, your head researcher. Because he and I are now best friends. We exchange emails all the time.

He came up with this great analogy.

This is like the drug dealer, who is new on the block. And he will not just start injecting people with heroin. That's not how you sell lots of drugs. That's not how you do it.

First, you get them hooked.

You just give them a little taste. And then after they get a little taste, now they're hooked. Then you can start really pushing the hard stuff. That's what this is all about.

The Federal Reserve is basically a drug pusher. Okay?

And this is the start of it.

Normally, regular folks like you and me, and people in the audience, we don't interact with the fed. We're not used to that.

We don't like the fed.

We don't trust them very much. And so what they want to say is, just have a little taste. You'll see. It will be great.

Just have a little taste. This is a steppingstone to a CBDC.

This is our first interaction to using the fed directly.

So that we can become more comfortable with it. So it's normalized. And then after this, you'll get a central bank digital currency.

We already know this, because there's a billion government reports talking about how they'll design it, what it will look like.

Why people should use it.

What the principles should be, behind it. All of that kind of stuff.

So we know a CBDC is coming. This is just the first step in that process, to try to normalize people interacting directly with the fed in this sort of high-tech instant transfer payment portal.

GLENN: So we've been talking about the uniform commercial code, which is complicated. And it's -- it's usually nothing anyone should ever have to think about. However, they have included central bank digital currency as the new definition of money.

But money makes us think of money, that you can take from the bank. That you own it. You get paid. You get to do what you want with it.

But central bank digital currency, is not really money. Correct?

JUSTIN: Yeah. What's happening in more than 20 states across the country right now, and it's going to happen in all 50 states eventually. Is lawmakers are looking at updating the Uniform Commercial Code so that a foundation is being laid for a future central bank digital currency.

And not just any kind of central bank digital currency, but a central bank digital currency that is programmable, trackable. That you won't have any privacy with the things that you're doing with the CBDC, that it can be controlled and manipulated. This kind of thing is being manipulated into the code. They don't use the world central bank digital currency. But they outline it, in such a way so that that has to be what they're talking about. So it's not creating the CBDC. That's not what this is aiming to do. It's just laying the foundation to make it easier to use it in certain kinds of commercial transactions.

GLENN: So people know, and this is what you really have to understand. This is not like Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is such a danger, because you get to do with it, what you want to do with it.

And the Federal Reserve is not aware of anything, and can't do anything.

You have the ultimate power with your money. The opposite is true with the fed coin, that they will be introducing. And this is what makes it so dangerous. Not just the tracking.

They're not -- they will not just know absolutely everything that you spend. But Justin said a key word that most people don't really understand. It's programmable. Meaning, it is programmable for the individual. So, in other words, if the government decides that they're going to -- you know, we need to get -- we need to cut down on fat, fat, fatties. Then my digital coin, will not allow me to buy fatty foods. I wouldn't be able to go to McDonald's. I'm using this as an example. There's not anything in the works to do this.

Except, this is what programmable means. They can program it, so if they say, you know what, nobody is going to work. You're not an essential employee.

Your coin will not buy gas.

So you can go to -- try to fill up. But when you put your digital card in the fed, it will say denied. And you won't have any way, other than that card, to be able to buy what you need. It's absolute control of your life.

JUSTIN: Yes. That is exactly right.

And there actually have been things. Statements that have been made by the Biden administration itself. Where it is said, as part of its reports, studying CBDCs and the benefits of it. And how it would be designed.

If they were to make a CBDC, even though they've haven't committed to doing that exactly. They have done all of the groundwork for it.

They've said flatout, that a CBDC needs to account for climate change. It needs to have financial inclusion built into it.

It needs to have equity built into it.

It needs to have concerns about pollution, built into it. They have worked with hundreds of stakeholders. And we all know what that means. Nonprofit groups. And labor organizations and others.

GLENN: Community activists.

JUSTIN: To help design the CBDC. So why are they doing all of that? Because it is going to be programmed, so that you can use it in certain ways, so that it can be prohibited in other ways.

And it can change on a dime. See, that's the other important thing.

It's not -- when it's programmable, they can change the rules whenever they want. It's not as though, they set the rules at the beginning, and that's the rules forever.

They can change the rules as they go. That's the threat of a programmable currency. So it's a huge threat to liberty.

GLENN: And all they will concentrate on is the one fact, and mark my words, this is the way it's going to happen.

We'll have a banking collapse.

Because there's a banking collapse, that will cause the dollar to skyrocket in inflation, possibly hyperinflation. Because you won't be able to have a supply chain anymore.

So many people will be unemployed. There's so much money awash, that if you want to buy something, well, you have 100 bucks?

Yeah. I'll buy that for $100. And it might be something that was worth $4 before the collapse.

And people will pay it. Hyperinflation will go crazy.

The fed will say, look, we have to stop it. Inflation is too much.

We will give you digital currency. It's already in a bank with your name.

All you have to do is sign in, and it will give you the money. And that is what will change inflation.

How do we know about that? Because we wrote about it, in a arguing -- I believe it was in Arguing with Socialists. A chapter we almost didn't put in about Modern Monetary theory. And Modern Monetary theory, is what we're operating on.

We can spend as much money as we want, don't worry about inflation. If they have digital control of everyone's spending.

JUSTIN: Right. Exactly right. We talked about it both in Arguing with Socialists and The Great Reset.

It's a huge part of both socialist plans and Great Reset's elites plans. And those are not necessarily the same group. But there's no doubt about it, that that's the goal.

So why are there 20-some-odd states in the United States right now? Many of them are red states. Texas, Kentucky, Arizona, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Missouri, Montana, Arkansas, et cetera.

Why are they all doing whatever they possibly can, on the UCC code, updating it to make it at least a little bit easier for a CBDC to be utilized in the future. When a CBDC doesn't even exist yet.

Why would they be doing that? That is a really, really important question. But it's much worse than everything we've said so far.

And that's -- having worked with these lawmakers across the country. We have started to discover things in the UCC.

In the commercial code, that are incredibly, incredibly disturbing. Things that most of us just didn't realize were true. And if CBDC's happen, we're in for a world of hurt, that we didn't see coming.

And the reason for that, is under commercial code. When you take money, like if you have cash right now, under the current code. And you go to the bank, and you put money into the bank.

That money is no longer your money. That money is actually now owned by the bank.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

This is why you -- and this changed. Part of this changed in 2008. You are the lender of last resort, right?

You are the last person in line, to get money, if you have deposited into the bank. Because the bank, when you give them that money, and deposit it. They are then taking that money.

They don't have to ask for permission to loan it out.

They take that money as theirs. And they loan it out.

So what happens to your money?

Well, you don't have money. You -- what you have is a number in the bank, that the bank can now give back to you, or if they go belly-up? Well, then, you lose your money because it wasn't yours anyway. Correct?

JUSTIN: Yes. It's not your money. It's owned by the bank now.

Now, you can go to the bank and say, I want my money back. And then they hand you the money in cash, and you can walk out the door. And that money is yours.

You own that money. But here's the thing about a central bank digital currency: And this is what we're beginning to learn.

How the commercial code deals with that. When you -- you can't put Central Bank Digital Dollars, okay? Digital fed coin. You can't put that in your pocket, and walk out the door. Can you?

It has to be somewhere. It can't be in your actual possession. And because of that --

GLENN: Well, wait. Bitcoin, you can put on a thumb drive. And so you can walk away with it. But digital currency, central bank, no.

JUSTIN: Yes. Correct. They're not going to design it so you can put it into a hard drive or something like that.

But even if -- even if they did, the uniform -- that's why they're updating the uniform commercial code the way they are.

They're putting rules into place, so that you could use a CBDC, even if it is possible to download it on to a hard drive or something like that.

But the layers behind the uniform commercial code, acknowledge in their various meetings and comments and other things, that it's highly unlikely that a CBDC would ever be designed in that way.

It's not -- you will have to put it into some kind of account. So what does that mean?

What it means in effect is that all of the money. All of the CBDC money that exists in society. Will be owned by whoever owns the account.

Which means the fed, or the bank. Or whoever is designated by the Federal Reserve Bank to operate that system.

But you, the individual person, will not own the money.

The money will belong to someone else. It will not belong to you. You will not own it. Under the commercial code, as it is written right now.

Forget about what they're advising it to. Under right now, you would not own any money.

It would all belong to someone else. So forget about whether it's programmable from a design perspective. In practice, it will not be your money anyway.

And so how can you not think of that famous article for the World Economic Forum, we've talked about a thousand times.

In the future, you will own nothing.

And you will have no privacy. Well, it seems like that's what the purpose of this is. So it is not enough to simply kill the UCC bill updates that we're talking about all across the country. That is essential. But we need to do more than that. We need to rewrite that code so that CBDCs cannot be used in a variety of other contexts as well.

GLENN: All right. Stand by. Stand by.

I think that we have to -- we have to really, truly get down to a basic line here, that you have to do in your own state.

And I'm not sure. And I want to talk to Justin. That the UCC code is enough.

And we'll talk about it here, in just 60 seconds.

You know, some people have a hard time falling asleep. I have a hard time falling asleep.

And what? Three times in the last seven days probably. I took Relief Factor sleep. It works wonders for me.

When you -- when you don't get your sleep, you fall asleep in meetings.

Oh, that's really good. When you don't get your sleep, you're not performing at your best. Relief Factor sleep is 100 percent drug-free. It's a blend of natural ingredients.

And it promotes healthy sleep by reducing anxiety and distress and improving mood. Promoting relaxation. My wife and I, we were in Costco yesterday, and we were loading up on, you know, just different medicines and things like that.

And I said, honey, because Rafe used to take melatonin. I said, you want to get some extra melatonin? She said, no, it doesn't work.

Relief Sleep is much better. And it's true. If it doesn't work for you, this is the same kind of thing as melatonin, except it's better, and it's all 100 percent natural ingredients.

So unleash the power of great sleep by calling 800-4-Relief. 800-4-Relief. Do it now. Or go to relieffactor.com.

Read all about it. Try it. It's really remarkable. And you are left refreshed. You don't feel it in your system at all. Dream big, sleep tight. Relief Factor sleep at ReliefFactor.com. Ten-second station ID.
(music)

GLENN: All right. Justin, we have -- we have been talking about the UCC code. And we've been telling people not to allow it to pass. Now you've been working with legislatures, all over the country. And these legislators are telling you, no. There's much more to the code. We have to change it.

Would it be better just to go for states passing law, that CBDCs can't be used for commerce?

JUSTIN: So it's a really complicated question because there are all sorts of issues related to the Constitution and who has the authority to regulate money.

And whether or not a state can even pass a law, that outright rejects the use of -- of an established form of money, at the federal level.

Because it's a federal responsibility, to coin money.

Of course, there are people who say, well, yeah. But coining money means physical money, not digital money.

And so maybe they are allowed to do it. And so I think there are a lot of open questions about that, that we don't necessarily know.

I think that the most effective thing that legislators can do.

And legislators actually do not know a lot of the things I've told you today. I've gotten that from a lot of UCC lawyers, actually.

But what they need to do. They need to focus first, in my opinion.

I think Americans would be much better off, if lawmakers killed the UCC bills. Okay?

If they killed the UCC bills to update them right now, they would be much better off.

But then they also need to update the UCC and all other state laws that they can possibly find, in ways, that would make it so that a central bank digital currency, is undermined in the state, in financial transactions.

For example, can you use a CBDC? A programmable digital currency, when you're using -- for collateral and a loan, let's say.

Okay?

State laws dictate some of that, and they can undermine that.

They can do things like that, to undermine the use of a CBDC, and I think that's what they have to do.

JD Vance: America is DONE Telling Other Countries How to Live

“The era of American preachiness and America telling other countries how to live their lives is OVER,” Vice President JD Vance tells Glenn Beck. Vance joins “The Glenn Beck Program” to comment on the Trump administration’s latest massive moves and what’s still to come, including President Trump’s history-making trip to Saudi Arabia and the Middle East. VP Vance also puts Western Europe on notice over its social media censorship plans, promises major spending cuts in the FINAL version of the “Big, Beautiful Bill,” lays out Trump’s plan t slash regulations on AI and energy companies, explains why staying ahead of China on AI is a matter of life and death, and tells a little-known fact about the Vatican’s role in global politics ahead of his trip to Pope Leo XIV’s inauguration.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We welcome to the program, the vice president of the United States, and somebody who I think has the presidency in his future. J.D. Vance. Welcome to the program, Mr. Vice president.

J.D.: Glenn, how are we doing?

GLENN: I'm great. I'm great. What an amazing few days the president has had, first with all of the foreign wins before he left, with the wars, you know, and everything in the State Department and Marco Rubio is doing. And now, this speech. I think this Riyadh speech is historic. On so many levels. How would you describe what's going on in the Middle East this week?

J.D.: Yeah. So I agree with you, Glenn. About that particular speech. I mean, when I listen to it. And I obviously knew a little bit about what the president was going to say. It changed a little bit. I was there the last couple of days. But the core message is very simple. That America wants not to remake the world in America's image. We don't want to force our allies to adopt our form of government. We actually want to be in the business of shared interests and shared economic cooperation. So long as you're not trying to kill anybody, and so long as you're interested in building wealth for your citizens and working with America, then America is open for business. And I think that's a very important signal to send to the world.

You know, the Obama administration economist Larry Summers had a very smart point, a few years ago. He said, you know, when the Chinese show up in the developing world, they show up with a bag of money. When Americans show up in the developing world, they show up a with a lecture.

And, you know, if you're given a choice between a lecture and a bag of money, you're going to choose the bag of money every step of the way. I think what the president is saying, is that era of American preachiness and America telling other countries, how to live their lives, that era is over.

And I think it's a very important point for the Middle East. It's a very important point for the whole globe. And in some ways, only President Trump could have made that argument at this point in time.

GLENN: Are we stopping with the bags of money too?

J.D.: I think we're stopping with both. But we are really looking at economic cooperation. And, you know, in Africa, for example, Glenn, you have America diplomats sent by the Biden administration, who are telling very conservative Christian African countries, that they need to fly the LGBTQ flag.

But they're not engaging in any economic arrangement where, you know, the Africans have critical minerals that we need. They have other industries that we can be participating in, we can be partnering on, and I think that's the bags of money point.

It's not that we'll give them money, but that we can have some shared economic relations with a conservative African country, where we won't tell them how to live their lives. We actually just want to enter into a partnership with them.

And that's, again, a big, big change.

It's a big shift, but it's an important shift from a very dumb American policy, to a very smart one that I think will benefit the next generation.

GLENN: There was this old TV show. It was a game show when I was a kid, called the 20,000-dollar Pyramid. And they would allow you to say, pass, and you could just skip the subject of the question. I give you that. We're playing the 20,000-dollar pyramid here. You know, I look at the reaction of your speech in Europe. Then I see the moves that they're making. I see the new Prime Minister of Canada. Who is the architect of the Glasgow financial accords.

And I'm not sure we're on the same page anymore.

Is -- is -- we can be friends with everybody.

But I'm not sure we're walking down the same path anymore. With those countries.

J.D.: Well, it worries me, Glenn. Because look, there are certainly some economic benefits and friendships that we can have with a lot of our, you know, sort of western European and obviously our Canadian friends. But in western Europe, in particular, you know, my view on this point is, our relationship with western Europe is what's going to be unique. You know, America, of course, started as an English economy. We're always going to have a special relationship with the United Kingdom. But what that means you fundamentally is that if we see certain European countries in Germany, for example, where we have 38,000 troops.

If we see Germans do something incredibly offensive to American values, I think Americans are going to recoil a little bit at that. You know, I went to Germany very recently, very briefly, Glenn.
Just to visit the troops and say, hello.

And I was hearing from Germans during that very brief visit on the ground, saying that they were worried about free speech policies in their own country.

Well, if we have 38,000 troops there and we're living amongst the Germans, we're literally defending their country.

I think you can expect Americans to at least express some negative opinions about some of the free speech policies they're seeing in Europe.

And, Glenn, you know this as well as anybody. Things that start in Europe. Sometimes come over to America. The same way that things that start in America, make their ways to Europe.

The kind of social media censorship that we've seen in western Europe.

It will -- it's already made its way to the United States. That's the story of the Biden administration, silencing people on social media.

So we will be very protective of American interests when it comes to things like social media regulation.

We want to promote free speech. We don't want our European friends telling social media companies that they have to silence Christians, or silence conservatives.

GLENN: Right.

J.D.: And I think there will be that friction over the next ten years. It's not that we're not friends. But there is a disagreement you didn't see ten years ago.

GLENN: Right. So they've decided they will not pursue being a leader in AI. But they will make all the rules. How confident are you, that we are in a -- a winning position here on AI?

It is advancing so rapidly. And the things that I hear that come out of China, it's either another way hipped. It's all a paper tiger. Or they're way ahead. Where are we, do you think, on AI and, you know, AGI.

J.D.: Well, I think that we're ahead, Glenn. But nobody -- nobody says that we're way ahead, should be believed. You know, in artificial intelligence, six months is a lifetime. Twelve months is a generation. We're probably 12 months, maybe two years ahead of where the Chinese are, when it comes to critical hardware, when it comes to necessary infrastructure. When it comes to the engineering talent. But that is not very far ahead at all. And we're really going to have to invest a lot in developing America's next generation of scientists. Glenn, we're going to have to make sure that our hardware companies, that we stop regulating them to death. That our energy infrastructure. That we stop regulating them to death. Because if we allow the Chinese to catch up. We may never ever have an edge on China in this space again.

And I think for a lot of people, artificial intelligence is a chat bot. It's something that maybe helps a college student write a paper.

No, no, no. The artificial intelligence that I'm worried about, Glenn, is the kind of intelligence that helps them develop next generation weapons. It helps their rockets and missiles hit their target, and 99 percent more accurate than the weapons that use artificial intelligence. They're just massive defense technology implications of this.

That it's kind of like, what would have happened, if the English Army had faulted the Americans in the Revolutionary War, and we had M-16s and they had muskets.

We don't want to be on our battlefield of the future and have -- you know, we have the muskets, and the Chinese have the M-16s. I think AI is the critical part of staying ahead of the Communist Chinese.

And it's something, look, we're very focused on. We have a great guy. It's David Sacks in the administration who is leading this effort. But it's full pedal to the metal, Glenn. We have to constantly be innovating and staying ahead of the game. We can't follow the European lead of regulating. We want America to innovate, and that's what we're doing.

GLENN: I spoke to the president a couple weeks ago. And, you know, I was going to ask him about nuclear energy. And he just volunteered. I said, what about energy with AI?

And he went to say, you know, we're talking about making them their own -- you know, their own utilities. And they can build it. We can clear, even if they want nuclear power plants. That didn't print.

I mean, I thought that was one of the bigger headlines of my lifetime. And nobody seemed to pick that up, or care about that.

And we do lose, if we don't have these power plants. Are we -- what are we doing to accelerate?

I mean, they need 99 percent of our power by 2028.

99 percent of the power that's currently being made.

We need power plants.

J.D.: Yeah. You're a smart guy, Glenn. Because I don't know what else the President said during that interview, but I doubt it's as important as that point.

GLENN: Nothing.

J.D.: This is a critical issue. And, yes, what we've done. We've had Lee Zeldin's EPA, and all of our environmental folks look at how we cut through the red tape. And make it possible. Because the market would do this. Right?

These companies would like to do this.

But it's the environmental bureaucrats that have told them, you can't really attach any power plant off-grid to a pure, you know, artificial intelligence hardware facility. We're tearing down those regulations and making it possible again.

And then, of course, Glenn, part of this is not just building these facilities, but it's powering them with the fuel that we need. And the president -- you hear this term, all of the above.

The President has really said, we're all of the above.

GLENN: Have to be.

J.D.: We're lowering the regulations on coal. We're powering the natural gas folks.

Petroleum, obviously, nuclear.

Like, this is a president who said, all power that we have, we need to put it into this prospect. And, Glenn, one important point on this. You look at a chart of electric degeneration, the People's Republic of China versus the United States.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

J.D.: Four years ago, we blew them out of the water. Right now, the PRC is producing about three times as much electricity as we are. And we flatlined in the last 20 years. That innovation. That development.

That's got to change. We've got to be producing more power for the next wave of innovation.

It's maybe the most important part of the puzzle.

GLENN: So I did a show last night on just that a reset is coming. It's inevitable that a reset is coming. We have to hurry, cut the budget. Onshore. Fix the tariff -- or, the trade deficit, or we don't really have a chance of doing anything.

And as I was looking at -- we ran three different models through AI, and they all came back with the same stuff. And we're doing those -- the president is doing those things, except for the cutting of the budget.

I mean, Congress won't even pass the DOGE cuts. When will the White House become strong on, you must cut the spending?

J.D.: Yeah. Great question, Glenn. And I will say, the big, beautiful bill text just came out last week. That's going to change a lot from now until then. We've already had conversations with, you know, House leadership that we want to see some more significant efforts to rein in spending here. You know, the President also believes, Glenn, and I think he's right about that, that if you cut the trade deficit or you raise revenue through tariffs, then you actually go a long way to making the country on the worst single fiscal pathway as well.

But you're right. You can't do it without cutting domestic spending. We're going to have to do a series about it. Think about as clear Congressional leaders as possible.

But, look, you know, knock on wood here.

But I think that once we get the final package out of the House and the Senate, we're going to have something that is serious on -- on budget cutting.

One final point on this, Glenn. No one is talking about it. When I talk to Elon. When I talk to the DOGE folks. Whereas where they think they will get the most cuts. Is in taking people. Illegal aliens. And other people who are defrauding the Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security system.

But you think about two people, right? A guy who paid his Social Security for four years. Obviously, we want that guy to get his Social Security benefits.

You compare that person to an illegal alien, who engaged in Medicaid fraud. Obviously, we don't want that person to get their benefit. I think Democrats are going to fight us on this. But this is such an important point, we cannot allow people to defraud the Medicare and Medicaid system. Or it's going to bankrupt this system. It's also just fundamentally unfair. I don't want people who shouldn't even be here be on the public dole.

GLENN: Right. I know you're headed to the Vatican. You're going to be celebrating the inaugural mass of Pope Leo this weekend, along with Senator Rubio, who is also Catholic. You had one of the last conversations with the last Pope.

Why -- why does the pope matter so much to the world?

And I want to talk beyond faith and religion.

Why is he so important?

J.D.: Well, obviously, right?

He's the leader of 1.4 billion Catholics. And so there is just a lot of soft influence. Right?

He doesn't have a military. He doesn't have an army. But he does have a lot of influence to the Catholics. And I think a lot of Catholics -- I think we won a majority of Catholics in the last election. But a lot of the Catholics continue to vote Democratic. And so, you know, there is just a natural influence in -- in having the ear of 1.4 billion faithful people, including, you know, 100 million or so, in the United States.

I also think, Glenn, something I picked up on.

And you don't see a lot of headlines about this.

But the Vatican has already played a very constructive role in some of the peace conversations that we've been having all over the world.

They've been trying to facilitate negotiations between the Russians and the Ukrainians. They've been trying to facilitate other peaceful negotiations between various countries, and so they have that soft power. Right? They have the ear of the Catholics.

But then they also have the ability to use that soft power, to play a mediating role in some of these disputes. So while the pope doesn't have an F-35 standing behind him, he does have the prayers of a lot of faithful Catholics.

And that matters when you try to insert yourself in these conversations. So we welcome that engagement. As you know, the president really believes that we can have less conflict in the world, if we just have cooler heads prevail.

So we welcome that engagement, and we will continue to do so in the next few years.

GLENN: Thank you so much, Mr. Vice President, for all you do.

If you don't know why he picked Leo as his name, you in particular will be fascinated by it.

You will have to ask him. Because it's -- it's -- you'll love the reason why he did it. Have a safe trip. Thank you for everything that you've done, and Godspeed.

J.D.: Thanks, Glenn. Buh-bye.

GLENN: J.D. Vance, our vice president.

Did China’s DeepSeek Just Create a TERRIFYING New Kind of AI?

Has China’s DeepSeek developed a “completely different species” of artificial intelligence that’s smarter than anything we’ve ever seen? Or are the rumors all lies generated by an AI bot? Glenn reviews some of the latest terrifying and SOCIETY-CHANGING advancements in AI, including how scientists have developed a new AI tool that can tell your biological age and potential health issues using just a picture.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I want to talk to you a little bit about AI.

Apparently, there is a new AI that the scientists at Mass General in Boston have developed a new AI tool called Face Age.

And it can tell your biological age by a picture of you. And apparently, not just -- not just your biological age. But how healthy you are.

In fact, they are -- they believe now, with the eyeball test.

Research in the Lancet digital health. Indicates -- you ready for this?

That artificial intelligence will be able to not only spot that you have cancer.

But also, if you are being treated for cancer.

That's not working.

They have this much time to live.

How terrifying is that?

I mean, how great is that?

How terrifying is that know. Would you have -- if you could have it, and it would tell you, wow. You're looking pretty old and beat up! You don't have much longer to live.

Would you go into the face tool? And say, how long do I live?

How much longer -- I do not think I would do that. I don't want that.

STU: I would want to know if I could do something about it, I suppose.

I mean, I guess, being able to -- if you knew -- and, again, this is somewhat speculative here.

But if you knew, you were going to die in two months, I guess, I -- the idea of wanting to know, would be intimidating.

But I also think, I would like to probably have moments with my family and my kids, and say the things I want to say.

And like, get my affairs aligned, and such.

Start some new affairs.

GLENN: New affairs. Wait. What?

STU: Just kidding, honey.

No, but I would like to get -- if you want to get your affairs arranged, you want to make sure that you're not leaving your family with a burden. You want to make sure you say to your kids, the things you want to say. Maybe you want to write something.

GLENN: Okay. What if you put your face in? Okay. And you take the picture. What do I have left? And it just comes back. What time is it now?
(laughter)

STU: I don't know. If this stupid device can't tell time. It's like a VCR.

GLENN: I don't know. Twenty minutes. Twenty minutes, maybe. Maybe. I don't know. You're not doing well. You're looking a little peaked.

Some of the things that are coming with AI are remarkable. Go ahead.

STU: Life-changing too.

I would say, society changing, probably.

GLENN: So can I just read something to you, that is part of it is beyond my understanding.

And will be beyond something -- and I just want you to hear this.

This is I rule the world MO. This is @IruletheworldMO.

Nobody knows who this really is. They think that this may be an insider, and one of the big AI research firms.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: But they also think it might be a bot by one of these AI research terms to throw the other research terms off. Okay?

They have no idea who this is. Okay.

So, but just listen to what -- I'm hoping it's a bot that is trying to throw people off.

Listen to this. Just got off a four-hour phone call with sources inside Chinese DeepSeek labs.

And holy cow, they're using other language. We are so F-ing behind, it's not even funny anymore.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: DeepSeek R2, it's not an incremental improvement.

It is a completely different species of intelligence, operating on principles nobody in the West has even theorized yet.

They have abandoned transformer architectures entirely for something they're calling recursive cognition lattices.

The scale in dimension of our math doesn't even have a good notation for this.

The compute efficiency gangs that violate what we thought were fundamental limits like 400 times improvement in reasoning per teraflop.

Not four. Not 40. Four hundred times. Our benchmarks now are literally meaningless.

The scariest part isn't the raw capability.
But how it's developing novel mathematical frameworks on the fly to solve problems. Research gives it questions, and it invents entirely new branches of mathematics to answer them. One physicist showed it a problem they've been stuck on for 15 years. They solved it in seconds with notations nobody recognized. It took three days for them to translate its solution back into standard mathematics.

We saw demo videos that can't possibly be real, except multiple independent sources confirmed.

R2 designed and simulated room temperature, super conductor, from first principles in under an hour, complete with fabrication methods, using existing technology.

They've already produced the samples in the Beijing labs. Blah, blah, blah.

Their -- their in -- I can't say it.

STU: Interrogation?

GLENN: No. No. No. No. Merging with man and machine.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: With biological systems.

STU: Integration?

GLENN: Integration. Thank you. With biological systems is the real nightmare fuel. Two-way neural interfaces that make Neuralink look like a child's toy. Direct cognitive enhancement already in human trials.

This isn't even the most advanced system. They're the ones showing it publicly. America is still treating this like normal technology race, while China understands. It's the an extinction-level transformation of civilization.

It's like watching a nuclear power race, where one side is debating the ethics of gunpowder.

STU: Wow. Because my -- my recollection of the DeepSeek story, when that came out a few months ago.

GLENN: It was nothing --

STU: Experts landed on the idea that there is absolutely -- like they basically were using our technology.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: It wasn't as impressive as we initially thought. So this person or bot is saying, that it is.

Now, I will say, if you are a person trying to hide your identity. Just saying, you just had a four-hour conversation with a specific company, I mean, how many four-hour conversations happened that day? It would be a weird way to hide your identity unless you're -- so who knows, maybe it's just all blown out.

GLENN: Hopefully it's all blown out.

I mean, you read the -- Sam Altman follows -- others follow. It's not just. It's seen inside the circles. And they don't know who it is, or what it is.

STU: That's true.

GLENN: A post like that makes me think it's a Chinese bot.

STU: Because it seems like it's promoting DeepSeek. Right? That's just amazing.

GLENN: Yes, but he's not always promoting DeepSeek. Or it isn't promoting it. And this is the craziest part. You don't know! Now it doesn't have to be a person!

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: It could be an algorithm.

STU: Now, of course, there is this thing -- you know, there's no -- what is it? There's no -- there's no limit to the levels humans can achieve when you don't care about pain and suffering.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: I think paraphrasing Louis C.K. for that one. Chinese can just throw bows at this. They're doing a lot of human trials on this stuff. As we've seen, maybe with Wuhan in the past. They're kind of willing to do anything. Right? And if they're doing this. And actually seeing these advances, we wouldn't do.

GLENN: No.

STU: You wouldn't be in human trials yet for any of this stuff. Although, a very long ramp up for Elon Musk's company, as we've seen some of that I guess. But they're just -- they'll just throw people at it.

GLENN: You know what's crazy is, we are dealing with technology that we have absolutely no idea, what it's going to be like, what it can do. Nothing, nothing, and I've read several articles, and they're talking about how just everything that you -- everything, the way you work, the way you think, is just about to be completely disrupted.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And we're just -- the world is just kind of going along with it. And we're like, I don't know. I don't know.

Maybe we should pass something about it. We're just going along with it.

And, you know, science. There's a -- there's a watch, I think it was Omega. I can't remember. There was a watch that was made in the 1950s and '60s, and its sweep hand, its second hand, it had like a lollipop on it. So it was the stick of the hand. And then it had like this little circle on it.

And it was sweeping around. And the reason why they put the lollipop around it, it was the citizenship signal to the buyer and the wearer. That that watch didn't have radiation in it. And it's not like, oh, you were working in a lab. It was that they were -- you know, we had put, to make things glow at night, that was radiation okay. To get the luminosity on watches. At first, we were like, why don't we just use some of this?

Okay. And that went on for like a couple of decades, you know.

And we were like, hey.

How come his arm keeps losing all of his hair in the first week of wearing that watch.

So they put this little lollipop on it. Yep. No radiation in this one, dude. That's crazy. That we could make.

We could do that kind of stuff. For that long.

And we kind of forget about it. And now, what are we working with? This will make nuclear stuff look like nothing. Like nothing.

STU: We're so close to it, as well, it seems.

GLENN: I read another post, where they were saying that -- that it is getting so fast in -- in for defense, that -- and I said this. I know I said this five years ago.

That you won't even know that you've lost the war. Because for you, the war hasn't even started yet.

But you will start and lose the war, in a flash.

And the time it takes you to go. Wait a minute.

There's a war going on. What?

You've already lost. It happened. And you've lost.

Because AI is going to get so good.

It will predict absolutely every move. That everybody is going to make.

And it will just go, oh, here's the countermove. And put it in.

And go, okay. Well, that's over.

STU: It's like when you -- you're not a big video game guy.

But when you start praying a game. And you just decide to go on the toughest level of the opposing AI.

And like, you just can't do anything.

You just automatically. Your base is destroyed in seconds.

That's a very -- very low level version of this.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Let me -- can I give you one other thing on AI.

I think this is fascinating. This is in the Wall Street Journal two weeks ago. I haven't heard anybody talk about it.

We've talked about it for a long time.

The surveillance state. I remember with you, taking calls from people. Going, I will not get an EZ Pass because that means they can track me when I go through the tolls. Right?

GLENN: Remember when we were in Tampa. This is the year 2000. They put cameras up in the streets of Ybor City. And everybody was like, I will -- not in America. Not doing that right now.

Nobody was willing to give their fingerprints. Nobody wanted to give their face. None of that.

STU: Yep. We all carried our phone. Of course, GPS everywhere we go. We click yes, agree. Agree. Agree to everything.

GLENN: We open the phone with our face.

STU: Yeah. Listen to this. This is amazing. This is from an author Joanna Stern.

GLENN: Wall Street Journal.

STU: Wall Street Journal. I've been wearing a wire everywhere since February.

That's how the article starts. I've got all the transcripts, important meetings, arguments with my kids, chats with disgruntled employees, late-night bathroom routines. There's plenty more I can't share, if I want to. And my bosses and my family as well, to keep liking me.

No, not an FBI informant. I willingly wear a 50-dollar bracelet that records everything I say. And uses AI to summarize my life. And send me helpful reminders.

GLENN: Why would you do that?

That's called a panopticon.

STU: Uh-huh. I think we're basically there. How do you have a private conversation in this world?

She tested two other devices as well, that are on the market now for 159, $199. They recall every single thing.

They transcribe every single thing. They have recordings of every single thing that was said by her or around her.

GLENN: Let's try it --

STU: That's crazy. Crazy.

GLENN: Crazy? No, it's crazy not to try it, to show everybody how bad it is, but it would be crazy to do it and be like, I think that's going to be a great addition to my life.

STU: Hmm. She says, within hours of wearing this bracelet, I was blown away at how quickly it turned ramblings and random chatter into useful, actionable information, yet allowed me to quote myself from February 24th at 5:15 p.m. This bracelet is really F-ing creepy.

Apparently said that out loud.

But, I mean, you can see. Again, I can see a world where that probably would be beneficial. You have a conversation with someone about something. What did they say? You would have it. When you were saying, hey. We should get together next Thursday.

It puts something in your calendar. That says, hey, call this person about that Thursday meeting you discussed. Of course, that would be beneficial in some way. It's like having an assistant. If you are an executive, you have an assistant.

GLENN: Those bots are already -- by the end of the year, those will be strong everywhere. You will have that assistant doing that in your phone and everything else. It will already do that.

STU: This is the death of private conversations though. They're over.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Every single time you have a conversation, you should act like you're on television, having it.

GLENN: Yes.

Well, we've lived that way for a long time.

STU: That's what made me so interested.

Video of the day

Rand Paul: Trump Just Had His “Tear Down This Wall” Moment

President Trump’s trip to Saudi Arabia and the Middle East was historic for many reasons. But Glenn and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) agree that perhaps the biggest moment was when he denounced “western intervention” and “so-called nation builders.” Gone are the days of a system that led to endless wars and destroyed nations. Instead, Trump is aiming to let nations develop themselves through good trade relations. Sen. Paul also comments on Boeing’s Air Force One delays, Qatar’s plane offer, why he can’t support Congress’ current version of Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill,” and what might be in store for Dr. Fauci regarding COVID investigations.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We welcome to the program Rand Paul, senator from the great state of Kentucky.

Rand, I want to play something for you. And in yesterday's speech, which I think should have been like a Libertarian's dream. It was mine.

Listen to this.

DONALD: And it's crucial for the wider world to know, this great transformation is not coming from Western interventionalists, or flying people in beautiful planes. Giving you lectures on how to live. And how to govern your own affairs. No. The gleaming marbles of Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, was not created by the so-called nation builders, neocons, or liberal nonprofits like those who spend trillions and trillions of dollars failing to develop cabal, Baghdad, so many other cities.

Instead, the birth of a modern Middle East has been brought by the people of the region themselves. The people that are right here. The people who have lived here all their lives, developing your own sovereign countries, pursuing your own unique visions, and charting your own destinies and your own way.

It's really incredible what you've done. In the end, the so-called nation builders wrecked far more nations than they built. And the interventionalists were intervening in complex societies.

That they did not even understand themselves. They told you, you had to do it. But they had no idea how to do it themselves.

Peace, prosperity, and progress ultimately came not from a radical rejection of your heritage, but rather, from embracing your national traditions and embracing that same heritage, that you love.

So dearly.

GLENN: Rand Paul, what did you think of that?

RAND: Pretty amazing. You know, there have been so many times, when I've heard President Trump speak, or seen his actions on foreign policy, that have been -- oh, my goodness. This is the best president we've had in my lifetime.

GLENN: I know. I thought he sounded almost like Washington at that point.

Just like, do it yourself. We're not here to tell you what to do. I haven't heard that ever, from any president.

RAND: And this is why the Bush wing hates Donald Trump so much as an establishment. Because these are the people who wanted to spend freedom at the point of a gun everywhere, they thought they were going to shape the world for democracy, which is a sort of leftover Woodrow Wilson idea. But, no. This is the part of Donald Trump I completely embrace, encourage, and will defend, and defend on a daily basis.

GLENN: So I said earlier today. That part of that speech was as significant as the Gorbachev tear down this wall speech. Agree or disagree?

RAND: I agree. It's incredibly significant to say, you know, we've helped these relationships, not by bossing around the world. Not by intervening. But by basically, you know, trading, and he didn't use the word trade. He could have.

But basically, having trade and good relations with these countries that had to develop themselves.

GLENN: So while we're there, why don't we talk about -- why don't we talk about, I don't know, trading nothing for 400 million-dollar airplane.

Where do you stand on this gift from Qatar?

RAND: You know, you can't take gifts, unless they're approved by Congress. I think Jefferson was offered something. And Congress actually voted against Thomas Jefferson being allowed to keep it. But you can't do it. I mean, it just -- and it's going to set up the appearance of impropriety whether Congress will protect him or not.

Possibly. But the other thing is, we're the world's largest arms merchant. We sell arms by the billions, everywhere throughout the Middle East. We populate the heads of every war on the planet.

And so Qatar is a big recipient of arms from us, and so we make these decisions. And the president pretty much makes them on his own.

Congress has the chance to object, and I've objected in the past with arms, when I felt like -- particularly when the Journalist Khashoggi was killed by the Saudis. I thought we should have laid off arms for a while, and somebody should have had to pay some penance over that.

GLENN: Great.

RAND: And so I've tried to block different arms sales before, but there's a potential that the administration's protectiveness will be codified over a million dollar plane. There are also practical concerns as well.

One of them is, is where are we on the one that they have ordered? And it's already made. And they're just upgrading it, you know, putting the electronics, defensive weapons on Air Force One, and they're within six months of being completed.

Qatar's plane would have to be completely outfitted. It will probably have to be stripped down on the inside, completely reconfigured. And has to have the special stuff, the way it's classified.

GLENN: Yeah, it's two to five years just to finish it.

RAND: It may be that the other plane is actually closer to being finished.

Boeing is disappointing on so many fronts. But they haven't had this plane, since I think it was commissioned by the first President Trump. And four years later, still not there. It's really a disappointment. But we have to know more about it. The thing is, if he really wants this plane, and it's a great plane.

The Qataris can sell it, or give it back to Boeing. And Boeing can work with us, and we could pay a price. And then we would mediate all of this.

If he takes every family transaction that they have had in the Middle East for the last ten years or the next ten years, it will be heavily scrutinized. And I think it doesn't come to any good.

GLENN: Yes. So what do you think about the possibility -- and this may be giving him too much benefit of the tout.

But the guy is playing 15-dimensional chess it seems, in so many ways.

He -- I spoke to him about the Boeing plane a few weeks ago, and he was smoked.

And, you know, we -- we began our participation in and ended World War II in a quicker time than we have ordered that plane in 2018, to today.

So it's -- I mean, it -- what is Boeing doing?

And he's saying, and others are saying, that it may be five years from now. May be even ten!

What about the idea that he is just trying to push the pressure on Boeing, and like, get it done!

VOICE: Boeing has become an extension of the government. They're a government bureaucracy. And they behave like it.

Now, look, I think the Empire State Building was build in a year. China right now is, what's that?

GLENN: Ten months.

RAND: Yeah. Ten months. China can erect a 30-story building in a matter of 2 or 3 months. I mean, it's amazing how fast things can be done. And Boeing can't make a plane in four years, and some other planes don't fly. And so that is a problem. If you're a plane manufacturer and they don't fly. It's because Boeing is such a slow ponderous corporation. It's been, you know, had a monopoly on sort of government planes for so long. That near being outcompeted internationally.

And just slow. And so I see them more as an extension of government bureaucracy, than I do as a real capitalism. But no company could get away with being this poor, this slow moving, if there was a real marketplace.

GLENN: So what do you do to solve it? Because I think that is the real solution.

I feel like the former Soviet Union, when Gorbachev or anybody else would get into a ZiL. You're like, oh, that's nice.

That will break down halfway to the airport.

You know, what do we do?

Boeing, you can't sue Boeing. The president can't sue Boeing. The country can. How do you fix this?

RAND: Here's the interesting thing. This intersects with the discussion over trade. Some would say, that's what we do.

We protect Boeing. Protect them from international trade.

What if we did this? What if we got rid of the trade barriers, and we let all the international companies compete with Boeing? Boeing would have to get better or go bankrupt.

So they're inefficient because they are protected. Some would say that that's what happened to US steel over many generations. What if we do protect US steel. We've had steel import quotas for generations. We've tried to do whatever we can to block international steel from coming here. And yet, all it did was it led to a large behemoth of US steel that was about like Boeing was. And it would react to the marketplace.

GLENN: Let me talk to you about government aircraft. Military aircraft.

We have to have an aircraft company.

RAND: I agree.

GLENN: What can we do?

Because honestly, the right thing for the president to do is sue Boeing. Look, you violated our entire contract.

It means nothing. I'm going elsewhere.

He can't sue Boeing. Because that would be very bad. The second thing, he has no choice, but to buy American.

So how do we solve this know.

RAND: The other thing, I guess you could do, you could reduce what they're paid.

For example, if the government said, we're giving them a billion. 500 million. Whatever it is.

That should be in every contract too.

And, you know, I think Elon Musk was a big promoter of this. When he started building rockets to take satellites into space.

He said, you know, the problem you guys have is its cost, plus. So everybody just keeps inflating their costs, and they always get the same profit or bigger profit, if they have cost overrun. Make competitive bidding, and put penalties in your contracts. So Boeing should have penalties in the contract.

If you want another airline or another company to make planes in the US, I'm perfectly happy to vote for no corporate taxes on some of the planes in competition with Boeing.

Just no corporate taxes, period. Ten years, 20 years. It would take a lot. It takes a lot of money to get started in that field.

Look, Elon Musk started from scratch. Maybe ten years ago. Building rockets. So you think somebody couldn't. Like Elon Musk, start building planes. I guarantee you, if Elon weren't so tied up with other things, if you said, Elon, why don't you start a plane company to compete with Boeing, I bet he would have it started within a year.

GLENN: Yeah, he would. Quickly, do you have time? Because I want to talk to you about the big, beautiful bill, and also Fauci. Do you have a second to hold on for one minute?

RAND: Absolutely.
GLENN: All right. Let me tell you about Relief Factor. They call it Quick Start. It's a three-week pack from Relief Factor. And if you've been living with pain, might be the most important 21 days of your year.

Day one, you're skeptical. You know, you've tried other things.

Day three, you start to notice maybe something. Pain is not gone, but it's not maybe as loud.

But you're moving a little freer. Sleeping a little better. By week two, you're starting to get a little hopeful.

You're waking up without that brace for impact feeling. And by day 21, a lot of people who try it. Are just feeling better. They are back to doing things that they stopped doing entirely.

Mine took about six weeks. I mean, I felt the difference in about three.

But in six weeks, it was like, oh, what happened?

It's not magic. It's not even a drug. It's natural. Anti-inflammatory pack that goes to the root of the pain.

Change your life right now. Call American -- call Relief Factor now. At 1-800-4-Relief. 1-800-4-Relief. Why didn't I -- good commercial copy, just changed to something else. Relief Factor.

1-800-4-Relief. ReliefFactor.com.

All right. Ten-second station ID. Back to Rand Paul.

I know you're giving us extra time. And I really appreciate that, Rand. But let's talk about the one big, beautiful bill. How do you feel about it?

RAND: Well, you know, the tax cuts from 2017, I supported. I support making them permanent. And really, I'm very supportive of the president's program on the tax plan.

That's a big part of the bill. The second part of the bill is there's supposed to be spending cuts. So far, I think they're pretty wimpy and not going to amount to much.

That's bothersome. But I would still vote for it.

Even if I got some spending cuts and that's confirmed. The reason I can't vote for it is because they will raise the debt ceiling $5 trillion.

And the reason I can't vote for that, is that it belies. It really contradicts everything about what would be in the hearing. We hear about Elon Musk and DOGE and all these cuts.

And we're all jumping up and down from our seats for Donald Trump. And then the deficit is going to be 2.2 trillion at the end of September. And then it's another 2.8 billion -- 2.8 trillion the next year. They're planning on adding $5 trillion in eight years. Which means there's going to be no reform. And conservatives are going to wake up at some point in this administration, going wow. Where did all these cuts go? What happened? We haven't seen them in a while.

And how come the deficit is going up at just an alarming rate? In the past, conservatives have never voted to raise the debt ceiling. It's always been all Democrats and the big government Republicans, and we know who they are. And we've always derided them. And it was a day of shame. The day of shame, you walked down to the well of the Senate or the House, and you vote for all the spending that you put forward. But most of the conservatives. Particularly myself and others. We haven't voted for the spending. And we don't want to vote for the debt.

Now, I have said I will vote for some increase in the debt.

I will give you three months' worth.

So I introduced an amendment about two weeks ago, increase the debt ceiling, three months' worth.

You know how much that is? $500 billion.

GLENN: Jeez.

RAND: That's an enormous increase. And it hurt me to even put it forward, but I did say this: We will give you three months. You're all promising me, we will cut some spending. We have a balanced budget.

We will do all these great things. I tell you what, proof is in the pudding. I'll give you three months for the borrowing power, then you come back and ask me again for four months.

So I would do the opposite. I would have a debt ceiling vote every three months, and it would be a lever. And we would only give you an increase in the debt ceiling if you were actually cutting spending. And people say, what about default? Default should never be on the table.

GLENN: That's -- that's fake. We're never going to default.

RAND: Yeah, well, we bring in 400 billion a month in revenue. And the interest payment is 80 billion. Why would you ever default? We should announce to the markets that we have plenty of money. And if we have to cut spending elsewhere, we will. But we won't default on our interest payment. There's no reason ever to. And this is a game they play, just to get everybody to vote for them. To scare the market to death. And scare everybody to death. And they will say, we will default and there will be chaos. There's no reason to default. We will just cut spending elsewhere. And we will take the first dollars we get, and towards the interest payment.

GLENN: This is the thing. I'm so mad at Congress right now.

I mean, they won't even go through with the DOGE cuts. They are -- they're arguing about those. And honestly, the DOGE cuts in the end, seem a little disappointing.

You know, they're not taking the steps that I thought we all voted for.

RAND: Well, the DOGE cuts are some of the lowest hanging fruit. I'm all for them.

They went to the foreign aid budget. And they found crazy stuff.

You know, 2 million for sex change operations in Guatemala.

GLENN: Right.

RAND: Hundreds of thousands for a trans comic book, a trans opera in Colombia.

And, you know what, they have it in the rescission package.

The White House has had this rescission package about four weeks now. It's only 9 billion.

So it's not enough to amount to anything, but it's still worth cutting. They're afraid to send it to the Capitol.

Because the feedback they're getting from Senate and House leadership is we don't have the votes to cut 9 billion.

And if that's true, these people need to -- the reason we sent the vote, so everybody knows who these people are.

Who are the people that can't cut out 2 million for sex changes in Guatemala?

You can't do that. They need to be ridden out of town on a rail.

GLENN: Can you give us some indication of how long we have?

I mean, people have been saying, it's going to get bad. It's going to get bad.

We are really, truly at the end. If we don't cut our spending.

How much time do we have to cut our spending before we're just overwhelmed by interest payments?

RAND: I think it depends on what the interest rate is. For many, many years, we have gotten away with this. The George W. Bush, we went 5 -- 5 trillion in debt to 10 trillion. Our interest payment went from four to two, and then everybody was gleeful, even the Dick Cheney conservatives. Like, oh, that doesn't matter.

Well, if you keep cutting your interest rate now, and doubling your debt, you can get away with it.

But now we're stuck at the opposite end. We're 36 trillion in debt. And the interest rate is going up.

Now, it stabilized a little bit. But interest rates went where they were in 1990. When I bought my first house, it was 11 percent.

Probably pay a little less than that. Maybe nine. Maybe eight. We couldn't pay it. We couldn't pay it today. So it depends on the interest rate. The interest rates now, we're struggling. Interest payments is the largest item in the budget, and it's crowding out other spending. So we are struggling. We bring in 5 trillion in revenue, and we spend 7 trillion.

The entire budget that Congress votes on, which is almost 2 trillion, is all borrowed. So the discretionary spending, what government votes on, military and non-military discretionary, it's all borrowed.

The entitlements soak up every dollar of revenue. We are in a bad way. I can't tell you when it ends, but I can tell you, if interest rates spike, we will be in a serious problem.

GLENN: Yeah. I now only have about 40 seconds.

I would love to have you back. Can you just tell me, is anyone going to pay for the COVID thing? Is that ever going to happen?

RAND: We're not done, and I will bring Anthony Fauci back in. We finally discovered the records, as to who determined that the money went to Wuhan. They have resisted me for three years. Robert Kennedy has helped me get the records. So was Jay Bhattacharya. This week or next week, we will begin interviewing the people who are on that committee. We are going to find out what was the debate?

What was the discussion. What were the arguments for sending it to Wuhan? What were the arguments against it?

Who made the arguments?

And then who ultimately had to sign off on this.

It was our belief that Anthony Fauci had to sign the document. We haven't found the document yet.

GLENN: Yeah. Thank you. Rand. Rand Paul.

Glenn slams Boeing’s collapse: Air Force One stalled until 2035!

Qatar has offered President Trump a free jet to use as Air Force One while Boeing continues to delay the completion of the two it was contracted to build (maybe by another TEN YEARS). Glenn doesn’t believe Trump should accept the gift, but he also believes that much of this is Boeing’s fault. This once-great American company has lost its way, and Glenn has had enough!

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Why is Boeing -- why did we order two 747s in 2018, and now Boeing is saying, they could come at 2028, which is a ten-year period.

Two planes.

But it may not be out until 2035, or '36.

How is that possible?

How is that possible?

I'll tell you how. They have forgotten who they are.

That's all that is required.

You know, and I don't think the workers have. Because look, my family -- much of my family worked at Boeing.

Still does.

They're working every day, at Boeing.

And they love Boeing. They don't like what it's become.

Because they know what it used to be like.

Because of their parents, or our grandparents.

And they know what Boeing is capable of. The reason why it takes this from Boeing, and we're accepting it, is because all of us have become like this.

We have become a society where no one says, yes, we can!

We can do that. Yes, we can.

Nobody says that, except if it's used by a politician to use as a slogan, to promote dependency, on a government, because what they're really selling I, is, no.

You really can't.

But with the government, you can.

That was -- that was -- that is not America!

It's not America!

We have to remember who we are.

And what the secret is.

And the secret is: Remembering the principles that got us here in the first place.
And then saying, yeah, I can do that.

I can do that. I can do anything.

You have been convinced that you can't, or you're not allowed to. What are you talking about?

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Boeing, shame on you.

Shame on you.

Every employee should be going in and saying, to the management, shame on you, for shaming us.

Shame on you!

You become so much about, I don't even know what.

The numbers?

Corruption.

DEI.

I don't even know what your problem is Boeing.

But it didn't start with the workers.

It started in the home office.

It starts on the floor, where all the elites are gathering.

You've made it about something else, other than building airplanes.

And, you know, people will think, that they have no way to change things.

Imagine what it was like, in World War II.

In World War II, you are -- you're just a head of a company. You can't turn things around.

Okay.

Yesterday, I -- I bought something. I traded. I collect watches.

And I traded almost all of them in, for one watch.

Because this watch, is so important. Historically.

And I'm wearing it today.

And it's called the POW watch.

Because it comes from POWs.

Back in World War II, the -- the president of Rolex. Didn't know what to do. Didn't know how he could help.

And he's reading about all the prisoners that are at POW camps in Germany.

And he wants to do something.

So he sends -- he sends the head guy, the head POW of the camp. Like a box of watches.

And is like, you give them out to whoever you think deserves them. Or needs them.

And, you know, and don't worry about paying. Don't worry about paying us back.

Well, he's doing it as a gift. But what happens? These are some of the first, like, Daytonas. This is before the Daytona was ever made.

The coronagraph on the front.

So the guy gets it, and he's like, wait a minute.

Now we have a precision way to time things.

We can time the changing of the guards. We can time how long it takes for them to come around.
And we can find the averages. We now know time, because we have a precision timepiece.

The guy at Rolex, he had no idea, what he was doing. If you've ever watched the movie, the Great Escape, that's a true story. We have many of the pieces over at the museum.

We have a piece of the pedestal, that the old Franklin stove as a sat on. That they had to move, as they were digging.

We have a ton of the stuff that they used.

But one of the most important things they used was a watch.

Just like this one! A POW watch. There's only a handful of them left.

Why are they important? Because it was the watch that helped them escape!

Helped them escape. It didn't do the work for them.

The first thing they had to remember is: They're not POWs.

They're not -- they are British and American and French soldiers.

And they are meant to be free. And they're meant to get out of there.

Now, there were people that were like, no. Let's not do that. It will just cause so much trouble.

Thank God. Most of them said, yes, we can.

We are going to do it.

Now, Boeing, let me just give you this stat, as you -- as you're sitting there, thinking.

We can't complete this airplane, Glenn.

It's really complex.

Let me just give you a couple of stats.

There were three escapes. What were they?

Tom, Dick, and Harry.

I think that's what they were called. Three different escapes. Okay?

Let me just give you the stats on one of them. They dug a two-by-two-foot hole.

I mean, this just gives me claustrophobia thinking about it. They dug a two-by-two-foot hole, underneath the floorboards of one of the --

STU: Barracks.

GLENN: Barracks. Uh-huh.

They had to hide all of that, and they dig a two-by-two-foot hole. They first have to dig that 30 feet down.

Two-by-two-foot hole, 30 feet down.

Then, by the way, they don't have shovels. They don't have any of that stuff.

They are making whatever it is they use. Then in that two by 2-foot hole. Then they have to dig 336 feet horizontally.

So they can get out from under the wire. And arrive at the other side.

Okay?

3362 by two.

Just think about removing the dirt.

How do they remove that much different, without getting caught?

And it might be easier, when you're pushing dirt up from the -- from the hole. For the first 30 feet!

But what happens when you're going 300 -- what was it?

336 feet horizontally.

How do you get that dirt out?

They had to design almost a train track, that was bringing that dirt out, for every inch, they did.

Every inch of dirt, had to be removed.

And they couldn't just take it out, in, you know, wheel barrows and dump it someplace.

How could they move that much dirt without anyone knowing that they were moving that much dirt?

They devised a system in their -- in their pants, to where, each of them could put a little bit of dirt in their pants.

And then when they got out to the yard. And they would walk around, they would slowly let that dirt fall on to their shoes, and on to their ground, as they walked.

And then they just kind of kicked it into place. Do you know how much dirt that was?

And they never got caught? Shame on you, Boeing. Oh, you can't finish a couple of planes. Huh.

You know how long it took them to do that know.

With no pools. No electricity.

No lights. Can't get caught.

Covering it all up.

Ten months!

Ten months. It's called the Great Escape.

SARA: That's a really cute, uplifting story. But did you know AI is going to be able to tell us what our pets are saying?
(laughter)

GLENN: Okay. All right.

I -- I want you to -- I want you to know, that what Sara says is right. Nobody has ever come back from this.

But no one had ever escaped from Stalin 13.

No one had ever done it.

No one had ever crossed the Rocky Mountains.

Nobody had ever gone to space.

No one had ever gone to the moon.

We are a nation of, that's never been done before.

That's what we do!

That's who we are.

Europe, that's not you.

But that is us!

Because every single one of us, someplace in our family history, somebody if you've been here, you know, prior to what? Maybe 1920, if your family was here prior to 1920, you came over on a boat.

Do you know what that was like?

I don't want to go on a boat back then. Especially if I was in a chattel class. My family came over in the 1800s. And I can guarantee you, none of them were up at the top deck of the boat. They were all, you know, shoveling poop out the window. I don't know they were doing.

But it wasn't pretty.

And now I'm going to piss this away?

When they worked so hard to get us here?

To have these -- see.

That, again, is the problem.

Once you forget why people came here in the first place, once you forget and are told, no. You can't.

You can't.

Yes, you can. If the government will help you.

But you can't do it on your own. Once you're taught that.

And you forget who you actually are.

This is why family heritage is so important.

Read about your family. Figure out who your family. Do your family tree.

There's somebody in there. In my family. When I got my family tree back.

This is what the person said to me. I would like to tell you, that there's somebody famous or great in your family. But we went back generations. There's -- it's littered with nobodies.

However, I found two heroes in my family.

Two. And they're not heroes by anybody else's standard. But they are mine!

I have two -- I had a great, great grandfather. Great, great uncle that fought in the Civil War. And they were on the right side.

Now, because they were my relation, they were caught like the first week. And they were put into Andersonville.

The worst, most notorious.

I mean, you want to talk about Auschwitz?

That was the Auschwitz of the South. They were put there, where thousands of people died. It was horrific.

One of them died. The other one survived. And according to his wife, was never the same from it. I can imagine. But they fought on the right side.

And one of them survived. And nobody survived Andersonville.

But he did!

You have to find your strength someplace. You have to find who you really are, you have to find -- and you'll find it usually when you find God.

Who you really are. And the strength that you actually have inside of you. And then, if you happen to be part of a group. Boeing. You need to look at each other. And go, come on, man.

Is this us?

For the love of Pete. Maybe it's because I grew up in Seattle.

You're Boeing.

You're Boeing.

That's what you want the world to think of you?

Boeing used to lead the way.

You're either going to lead the way. Or get the hell out of the way.

Give us our money back for those planes.

And we will find some company that will build them here in America.

What are you doing?

Either do it right, or get out of the way.

That's the message that should be heard from Boeing employees.

To their bosses. Like, now.