RADIO

Glenn CALLS OUT Mitt Romney’s ‘REPREHENSIBLE’ behavior

The far-left hates the U.S. Constitution, which is exactly why they also dislike Senator Mike Lee. And now, the mainstream media is spewing lies about the Utah Senator, accusing him of supporting unconstitutional efforts to change the outcome of the 2020 election. But this couldn’t be FURTHER from the truth. In fact, in this clip, Glenn and Stu read text messages from Sen. Lee that prove the media's claims are false. So, why then does Mitt Romney continue to antagonize his GOP colleague? It’s ‘REPREHENSIBLE’ behavior, Glenn says. ‘SHAME ON YOU,' Mitt Romney.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: There's a story out, that is a love letter to Mitt Romney.

And it really pisses me off. Really pisses me off. Do you have it up on your --

STU: Yeah. I have it up on your -- the appeal carried the unmistakable whiff of desperation.

GLENN: Okay. This is talking about Mike Lee on Tucker Carlson, just a couple of days ago.

STU: That it was delivered on live television, only heightened the dramatic tension, according to the New York Times.

A Utah Republican, senator Mike Lee was publicly begging a fellow Utah Republican senator Mitt Romney, for a simple act of solidarity.

GLENN: Now, hang on.

Do they spell begging, S-H-A-M-I-N-G?

STU: No. That's a different word.

GLENN: That's a different word. Huh. Because I thought it was more like shaming.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay.

STU: He wanted an endorsement for his campaign, one that in Mr. Lee's telling could amount to no less than an act of salvation.

GLENN: Wait. What?

STU: That would be a very strange thing, if Mike Lee said that, that way. I would be curious to see his wording on that. As he battles for his political survival against an unexpected fierce challenger, the independent candidate.

Evan Owen McMuffler. That's his new name apparently. Please, get on board, Mr. Lee said, looking into the camera, and addressing Mr. Romney by name on Tuesday night. Help me win reelection. Help us do that. You can get your entire family to donate to me.

Now, that sounds like a joke.

GLENN: He is -- he was shaming Mitt Romney.

He's not begging. He's shaming Mitt Romney. This is the first time, I believe, where this has happened. Where a junior senator won't support the reelection of the senior senator, on the same team, supposedly.

STU: Right.

GLENN: And so Romney is like, you know, I'm friends with both of them.

No, you're not. I know for a fact, you're not friends with Mike Lee. Mike might say he is friends with you. Because Mike is much more Christian than I am.

But believe me, if I were ever a friend counselor for Mike, I would be saying, he's no friend of yours. And I think -- so you're not friends with Mike Lee.

STU: Right. And the way this is worded. They're saying it's an act of desperation. They're saying, hey, help us get elected. You can get your entire family to donate to me. That's not someone who is desperate and begging. That's someone with a smirk on his face, pointing out the absurdity of the situation.

GLENN: They hate Mike Lee.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Let me translate. Let me translate. They hate the Constitution. They hate it.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And Mike stands up for the Constitution, every single time.

STU: He does.

GLENN: Even when he's like, it's killing me.

Oh. I have to do this. And he doesn't want to. But that's what the Constitution says.

STU: Uh-huh. You're right.

And it goes on. Mr. Lee, and Mr. Romney were and evidently rage antagonists in the lingering drama of January 6th, 2021. Question mark?

That's my question mark. They put a period there.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. So Mitt Romney was for the January 6th?

STU: I don't think so. But I know Mike Lee wasn't. Mr. Lee played --

GLENN: I didn't know that about Mitt Romney.

I'm surprised that Mitt was for the January 6th.

STU: Passionate proponent of it.

GLENN: Apparently. Wow.

STU: Because Mike Lee was not.

But they disagreed with this analysis. They said, Mr. Lee played a key role in support of President Donald Trump's attempt to subvert the 2020 election and cling to power.

GLENN: This makes me angry.

STU: It's insanity.

GLENN: It's not insanity.

It is an out-and-out lie.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: I know. I talked to Mike Lee, on January 6th. I talked to Michael Lee, before January 6th. We talked about how this is a very dangerous situational. And there comes a time. And that time was that day.

Done. You don't make the case. You don't make the case. You have to make the case.

And the time to make the case, was over.

STU: Yeah. December 14th is the -- is the date, in the Constitution, by the way.

GLENN: Mike knew that, was not for any of this.

Was not trying to -- oh, I can't take it.

STU: Now, what they're trying -- I guess they're pointing to.

Is these texts from Mike Lee. And I was like, I looked at these texts at the time.

And as someone who also did not think January 6th was a good thing. And also knew the date of December 14th.

GLENN: So you disagreed with Mitt Romney?

STU: Yeah. I guess so. I did not have a problem with him. So I wanted to go back and look at them. They're saying, he's a stalwart proponent of this theory. Okay?

GLENN: What theory?

STU: That you could overturn the election.

GLENN: No.

STU: No. I mean, obviously not.

GLENN: He was a stalwart proponent of get to the bottom of it. But you have very little time.

STU: Right.

GLENN: And if you can make the case, make the freaking case.

STU: So I went back to. This is the CNN article talking about it. January 3rd, Lee texted Mark Meadows saying, the effort could all babbling fire badly. Does that sound like a stalwart proponent of a theory?

GLENN: Start at the beginning. Go to the earliest text. It's the day after the election.

STU: Yeah. What was the election date. I don't remember. But it was November -- so this is November 7th. Immediately in the aftermath of this.

I think that may have been the date that they announced Biden as the winner, I can't remember. November 7th, Lee offered his unequivocal support for you. Meaning the Trump administration, to exhaust every legal and constitutional remedy at your disposal.

GLENN: Those are pretty important words. When you're talking about Mike Lee.

You're talking about Nancy Pelosi. That means nothing.

STU: That means nothing. Right. Mike Lee cares about the Constitution, cares about the law. So he said legal constitutional remedy at your disposal, to restore American's faith in our elections.

GLENN: That's not even saying -- that's not saying anything -- that's saying, what do we have to do, we should pursue it to the letter of the law, to restore faith in our elections.

STU: That is exactly how the system is set up. You have the window to challenge these things.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: Within the bounds of the law.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: Now, moving on to a little bit later. Let's see.

GLENN: He was for Sydney. What's her?

STU: No, yeah. This is -- okay. Here we go. Over a few days in November, Lee lobbied Meadows to get attorney Sidney Powell access to Trump. This is what they accuse him of. Sidney Powell -- this is the text he sent. Sidney Powell is sending -- saying that she needs to get in to see the president, but she is being kept away from him.

Lee wrote to Meadows on November 7th. Apparently, she has a strategy to keep things alive, and put several states back in play. Can you help her get in? Now, that's not a stalwart proponent of a theory.

Sidney Powell was a respected member of the legal community at this time.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And he doesn't even know what the theory is. She uses the word apparently. He doesn't even know what it is. But he's like, hey, she wants to get in there. Can you help?

GLENN: So I had her on the air, around that time. And I remember, what is the case? And she kept saying, we have this and this and this. And we'll keep presenting.

And I said to her on the air, you know, you have to make the case -- make the case. If you have it, make the case.

STU: Right. And we asked Sidney Powell to her face, on the air. Hey, you know the date is coming up in December, right? Where this is the end. Will you have the evidence, and present it by this date?

She said, yes. She would. She did not have that evidence. Said the same thing to Rudy Giuliani, by the way. He said he would be able to run it. He was not able to do it.

We all knew the rules going in. You might not like the rules, but those were the rules. And we talked about it at the time.

So now we get to the position, where Sidney Powell is now trying to reveal her case on this. And Mike Lee, the -- the supposed stalwart supporter of this, sees the case, and says, he's, quote, worried about the Powell press conference. This is in November. November 19th.

GLENN: That's the press conference. This is after we -- I think had her on the air.

And when I watched the press conference, I said, I don't think they have anything. They're saying the same thing they said a week ago. I don't think they have anything.

STU: Right. Then Lee texted Meadows. The potential defamation liability for the president is significant here.

For the capable and for the president personally. Unless Powell can back up everything she said, which I kind of duty she can. Mark Meadows replied, I agree, very concerned.

So like, this is -- they're painting Mike Lee as a supporter of this.

This is it don't have to 19th. This is along before anything even close to January 6th.

On December 16th, Lee goes to Meadows and asks for guidance. If you want senators to object, we need to hear from you, on -- on that. Ideally getting some guidance on what arguments to raise.

I think we're now past the point, where we can expect anyone will do it without some direction and some strong evidentiary argument.

Again, he's saying, you guys have not provided the evidence to support the objection. This is not a guy, who was a fighting for January 6th. And then he also said on January 3rd, Lee argued to -- this is to Meadows. I only know, this will end badly for the president. Unless we have the Constitution on our side. And unless these states submit new slates of Trump electors, pursuant to state law, we do not.

He is saying, we do not have this, unless you do it somehow weekly.

GLENN: See, to the New York Times, that doesn't mean anything. Because none of their politicians care about the -- they'll talk about the Constitution. I'm a big supporter of the Constitution.

And then they disregard it. With Mike Lee, it means something. And, you know, I -- I -- I spoke to him. On that day.

There are -- you know, I just can't -- I spoke to him on that day. He was not a supporter by any stretch of the imagination of what happened.

And Mitt Romney, you are absolutely -- you and your allies are reprehensible. Reprehensible.

How you can say that you are honest in all of your business dealings, is beyond me. Because you know this is not true. Shame on you. Shame on you.

TV

The Globalist Elites' Dystopian Plan for YOUR Future | Glenn Beck Chalkboard Breakdown

There are competing visions for the future of America which are currently in totally different directions. If the globalist elites have their way, the United States will slide into a mass surveillance technocracy where freedoms are eroded and control is fully centralized. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to break down exactly what their goal is and why we need to hold the line against these ominous forces.

Watch the FULL Episode HERE: Dark Future: Uncovering the Great Reset’s TERRIFYING Next Phase

RADIO

Barack & Michelle tried to END divorce rumors. It DIDN'T go well

Former president Barack Obama recently joined his wife Michelle Obama and her brother on their podcast to finally put the divorce rumors to rest … but it didn’t exactly work. Glenn Beck and Pat Gray review the awkward footage, including a kiss that could compete for “most awkward TV kiss in history.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Now, let me -- let me take you to some place. I think kind of entertaining.

Michelle Obama has a podcast. Who knew?

She does it with her brother. Who knew? It's -- you know, I mean, it's so -- it's a podcast with two brothers. Right?

And -- and it -- they wanted to address the rumors, that they're getting a divorce. And this thing seems so staged.

I want you to -- listen to this awkward exchange on the podcast.

Cut one please.

VOICE: Wait, you guys like each other.

MICHELLE: Oh, yeah. The rumor mill. It's my husband, y'all! Now, don't start.

OBAMA: It's good to be back. It was touch-and-go for a while.

VOICE: It's so nice to have you both in the same room today.

OBAMA: I know. I know.

MICHELLE: I know, because when we aren't, folks things we're divorced. There hasn't been one moment in our marriage, where I thought about quitting my man.

And we've had some really hard times. We've had a lot of fun times. A lot of adventures. And I have become a better person because of the man I'm married to.

VOICE: Okay. Don't make me cry.

PAT: Aw.

GLENN: I believed her. Now, this is just so hokey.

VOICE: And welcome to IMO.

MICHELLE: Get you all teared up. See, but this is why I can't -- see, you can take the hard stuff, but when I start talking about the sweet stuff, you're like, stop. No, I can't do it.

VOICE: I love it. I'm enjoying it.

MICHELLE: But thank you, honey, for being on our show. Thank you for making the time. We had a great --

VOICE: Of course, I've been listening.

PAT: What? No!

GLENN: They're not doing good. They're not doing good.

Okay. And then there was this at the beginning. And some people say, this was very awkward. Some people say, no. It was very nice.

When he walks in the room, he gives her a hug and a kiss. Watch.

Gives her a little peck on the cheek.

PAT: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Does that --

PAT: Does that look like they're totally into each other?

GLENN: Well, I give my wife a peck on the cheek, if she walks into a room.

PAT: Do you? If you haven't seen her in months and it seems like they haven't, would you kiss her on the cheek? Probably not.

GLENN: No, that's a little different. That would be a little different. But I wouldn't make our first seeing of each other on television.

PAT: Yeah, right, that's true. That's true.

GLENN: But, you know, in listening to the staff talk about this. And they were like, it was a really uncomfortable -- okay.

Well, maybe.

PAT: I think it was a little uncomfortable.

GLENN: It was a little uncomfortable.

It's still, maybe. Maybe.

But I don't think that rivals -- and I can't decide which is the worst, most uncomfortable kiss.

Let me roll you back into the time machine, to Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley. Do you remember this kiss?
(applauding)

GLENN: He turns away, immediately away from the camera. Because he's like.

PAT: He was about to vomit. Yeah.

GLENN: It was so awkward. When that happened, all of us went, oh, my gosh. He has only kissed little boys. What are we doing? What is happening?

He doesn't like women, what is happening?

And then there's the other one that sticks out in my mind of -- and I'm not sure which is worse. The Lisa Marie or the Tipper in Al Gore.

VOICE: The kiss. The famous exchange during the 2000 democratic convention was to some lovely, to others icky.
(laughter)

GLENN: That's an ABC reporter. To some lovely, others icky.

And it really was. And it was -- I believe his global warming stuff more than that kiss.
(laughter)
And you know where I stand on global warming.

That was the most awkward kiss I think ever on television!

PAT: Yeah. It was pretty bad. Pretty bad.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

So when people who are, you know -- these youngsters.

These days. They look at Barack and Michelle. They're like, that was an awkward kiss.

Don't even start with me.

We knew when we were kids, what awkward kisses were like.

PAT: The other awkward thing about that.

She claims, there was not been one moment in their marriage.

Where she's considered reeving him.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: She just said a while ago. A month or a year ago, she hated his guts for ten years. She hated it.

GLENN: Yeah. But that doesn't mean you'll give up.

PAT: I guess not. I guess not. Maybe you enjoy being miserable.

I don't know.

GLENN: No. I have to tell you the truth.

My grandmother when I got a divorce, just busted me up forever. I call her up, and I said, on my first marriage.

Grandma, we're getting a divorce.

And my sweet little 80-year-old grandmother, who never said a bad thing in her life said, excuse me?

And I said, what?

We're getting a divorce.

And she said, how dare you.

I said, what's happening. And she said, I really thought you would be the one that would understand. Out of everybody in this family, I thought you would understand.

And I said, what?

And she said, this just -- this just crushed me when she said it.

Do you think your grandfather and I liked each other all these years? I was like, well, yeah.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Kind of. And she said, we loved each other. But we didn't always like each other. And there were times that we were so mad at each other.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah. Uh-huh.

STU: But we knew one thing: Marriage lasts until death!

PAT: Did she know your first wife?

GLENN: Okay. All right. That's just not necessary.

RADIO

No, Trump’s tariffs ARE NOT causing inflation

The media is insisting that President Trump's tariffs caused a rise in inflation for June. But Our Republic president Justin Haskins joins Glenn to debunk this theory and present another for where inflation is really coming from.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Justin Haskins is here. He is the president of Our Republic. And the editor-in-chief of stoppingsocialism.com.

He is also the coauthor with me at the Great Reset, Dark Future, and Propaganda War.

So, in other words, I'm saying, he doesn't have a lot of credibility. But he is here to report -- I don't even think you're -- you're -- you were wrong on this, too, with the tariffs. Right?

JUSTIN: Well, at some point, I was wrong about everything.

GLENN: Yeah, right. We are all on the road to being right.

But this is coming as a shock. You called yesterday, and you said, Glenn, I think the tariff thing -- I think the president might be right.

And this is something I told him, if I'm wrong. I will admit that I'm wrong.

But I don't think I'm wrong.

Because this goes against everything the economists have said, forever.

That tariffs don't work.

They increase inflation.

It's going to cost us more.

All of these things. You have been study this now for a while, to come up with the right answer, no matter where it fell.

Tell me what's going on.

JUSTIN: Okay. So the most recent inflation data that came out from the government, shows that in June, prices went up 2.7 percent. In May, they went up 2.4 percent. That's compared to a year prior. And most people are saying, well, this is proof that the tariffs are causing inflation.

GLENN: Wait. That inflation is -- the target is -- the target is two -- I'm sorry.

We're not. I mean, when I was saying, it was going to cause inflation. I thought we could be up to 5 percent.

But, anyway, go ahead.

JUSTIN: So the really incredible thing though. The more you look at the numbers. The more obvious it is, that this does not prove inflation at all.

For starters, these numbers are lower, than what the numbers were in December and January.

Before Trump was president. And before we had any talk of tariffs at all.

So that is a big red flag right at the very beginning. When you dive even deeper into the numbers, what you see is there's all kinds of parts of the Consumer Price Index that tracks specific industries, or kinds of goods and services. That should be showing inflation, if inflation is being caused by tariffs, but isn't.

So, for example, clothing and apparel. Ninety-seven percent, basically.

About 97 percent according to one report, of clothing and apparel comes overseas, imported into the United States.

GLENN: Correct.

JUSTIN: So prices for apparel and clothing should be going up. And they're not going up, according to the data, they're actually going down, compared to what they were a year ago. Same thing is true with new vehicles.

Obviously, there were huge tariffs put on foreign vehicles, not on domestic vehicles. So it's a little bit more mixed.

But new vehicle price are his staying basically flat. They haven't gone up at all. Even though, there's a 25 percent tariff on imported cars and car parts. And then we just look at the overall import prices. You just -- sort of the index. Which the government tracks.

What we're seeing is that prices are basically staying the same, from what they were a year ago.

There's very, very little movement overall.

GLENN: Okay. So wait. Wait. Wait. Wait.

Wait.

Let me just -- let me just make something career.

Somebody is eating the tariffs. And it appears to be the companies that are making these things. Which is what Donald Trump said. And then, the -- you know, the economist always saying, well, they're just going to pass this on in the price.

Well, they have to. They have to get this money some place.

So where are they?

Is it possible they're just doing this right now, to get past. Because they know if they jack up their price, you know, they won't be able to sell anything. What is happening?

How is this money, being coughed up by the companies, and not passed on to the consumer.

JUSTIN: Yeah, it could be happening. I think the most likely scenario, is that they are passing it along to consumers. They're just not passing it along to American consumers.

In other words, they're raising prices elsewhere. To try to protect the competitiveness with the American market. Because the American market is the most important consumer market in the world.

And they probably don't want to piss off Donald Trump either, in jacking up prices. And then potentially having tariffs go up even more, as a punishment for doing that.

Because that's a real option.

And so I think that's what's happening right now.

Now, it's possible, that we are going to see a huge increase in inflation. In six months!

That's entirely possible.

We don't know what's going to happen. But as of right now, all the data is suggesting that recent inflation is not coming from consumer goods being imported, or anything like that.

That's not where the inflation is coming.

Instead, it's coming from housing.

That's part of the CPI at that time.

Housing is the cause of inflation right now.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. It's not housing, is it?

Because the things to make houses is not going through the roof. Pardon the pun. Right?

It's not building.

JUSTIN: No. No. The way the CPI calculates housing is really stupid. They look basically primarily at rent. That's the primary way, they determine housing prices.

GLENN: Okay.

JUSTIN: That so on they're not talking about housing costs to build a new house.

Or housing prices to buy a new house.

They are talking about rent.

And then they try to use rent data, as a way of calculating how much you would have to pay if you owned a house, but you had to rent the same kind of house.

And that's how they come up with this category.

GLENN: Can I ask you a question: Is everybody in Washington, are they all retarded?
(laughter)
Because I don't. What the hell. Who is coming up with that formula?

JUSTIN: Look. I mean, sort of underlying this whole conversation, as you -- as you and I know, Glenn.

And Pat too. The CPI is a joke to begin with.

GLENN: Right.

JUSTIN: So there's all kinds of problems with this system, to begin with.

I mean, come on!

GLENN: Okay. So because I promised the president, if I was wrong, and I had the data that I was wrong, I would tell him.

Do I have to -- out of all the days to do this.

Do I have to call him today, to do that?

Are we still -- are we still looking at this, going, well, maybe?

JUSTIN: I think there's -- I think there is a really solid argument that you don't need to make the phone call.

GLENN: Oh, thank God. Today is not the day to call Donald Trump. Today is not the day.

Yeah. All right.

JUSTIN: And the reason why is, we need -- we probably do need more data over a longer period of time, to see if corporations are doing something.

In order to try to push these cuts off into the future, for some reason. Maybe in the hopes that the tariffs go down. Or maybe -- you know, it's all sorts of ways, they could play with it, to try to avoid paying those costs today.

It's possible, that's what's going on.

But as of right now, that's not at all, what is happening. As far as I can tell from the data.

GLENN: But isn't the other side of this, because everybody else said, oh. It's not going to pay for anything.

Didn't we last month have the first surplus since, I don't know. Abraham Lincoln.

JUSTIN: Yes. Yes. We did. I don't know how long that surplus will last us.

GLENN: Yeah. But we had one month.

I don't think I've ever heard that before in my lifetime. Hey, United States had a surplus.

JUSTIN: I looked it up.

I think it was like 20 something years ago, was the last time that happened. If I remembered right.

It was 20 something years ago.

So this is incredible, really.

And if it works.

You and I talked about this before.

I actually think there is an argument to be made. That this whole strategy could work, if American manufacturers can dramatically bring down their costs. To produce goods and services.

So that they can be competitive.

And I think that advancements in artificial intelligence. In automation. Is going to open up the door to that being a reality.

And if you listen to the Trump administration talk. People like Howard Lutnick, Secretary of Commerce. They have said, this is the plan.

The plan is, go all in on artificial intelligence.

Automation. That's going to make us competitive with manufacturers overseas. China is already doing that.

They're already automating their factories. They lead the world in automation.

GLENN: Yeah, but they can take half their population, put them up in a plane, and then crash it into the side of the mountain.

They don't care.

What happens to the people that now don't have a job here? How do they afford the clothes that are now much, much cheaper?

JUSTIN: Well, I think the answer to that is, there's going to be significantly more wealth. Trillions of dollars that we send overseas, every year, now in the American economy. And that's going to go into other things. It's not as though -- when this technology comes along, it is not as though people lose their jobs, and that's it. People sit on their couch forever.

The real danger here is not that new markets will not arrive in that situation. And jobs with it. The problem is: I think there's a real opportunity here. And I think this is going to be the fight of the next election, potentially. Presidential election. And going forward.

Next, ten, 20 years. This is going to be a huge issue. Democrats are going to have the opportunity, when the AI revolution goes into full force. They will have the opportunity like they've never had before.

To say, you know what, we'll take care of you. Don't worry about it.

We're just going to take all of the corporate money and all of the rich people's money.

And we will print trillions of dollars more. And you can sit on your couch forever. And we will just pay you. Because this whole system is rigged, and it's unfair, and you don't have a job anymore because of AI. And there's nothing you can do. You can't compete with AI. AI is smarter than you.

You have no hope.

I think that's coming, and it is going to be really hard for free market people to fight back against that.

GLENN: Yes.

Well, I tend to agree with you.

Because the -- you know, I thought about this.

I war gamed this, probably in 2006.

I'm thinking, okay.

If -- if the tech is going to grow and grow and grow. And they will start being -- they will be responsible for taking the jobs.

They won't be real on popular.

So they will need some people that will allow them to stay in business, and to protect them.

So they're going to need to be in with the politicians.

And if the politicians are overseeing the -- the decrease of jobs, they're going to need the -- the PR arm of things like social media. And what it can be done.

What can be done now.

I was thinking, at the time. Google can do.

But they need each other.

They must have one another. And unless we have a stronger foundation, and a very clear direction, and I will tell you. The president disagrees with me on this.

I said, he's going to be remembered as the transformational AI president.

And he said, I think you're wrong on that.

And I don't think I am.

This -- this -- this time period is going to be remembered for transformation.

And he is transforming the world. But the one that will make the lasting difference will be power and AI.

Agree with that or disagree?

JUSTIN: 1,000 percent. 1,000 percent. This is by far the most important thing that is happening in his administration in the long run. You're projecting out ten, 20, 30 years ago years.

They will be talking about this moment in history, a thousand years from now. Like, that will -- and they will -- and if America becomes the epicenter of this new technology, they will be talking about it, a thousand years from now, about how Americans were the ones that really developed this.

That they're the ones that promoted it, that they're the ones that does took advantage of it.
That's why this AI race with China is so important that we win it.

It's one of the reasons why. And I do think it's a defining moment for his presidency. Of course, the problem with all of this is AI could kill us all. You have to weigh that in.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. Right.

Well, we hope you're wrong on that one.

And I'm wrong on it as well. Justin, thank you so much.

Thank you for giving me the out, where I don't have to call him today. But I might have to call him soon. Thanks, Justin. I appreciate it.

TV

The ONLY Trump/Epstein Files Theories That Make Sense | Glenn TV | Ep 445

Is the case closed on Jeffrey Epstein and Russiagate? Maybe not. Glenn Beck pulls the thread on the story and its far-reaching implications that could expose a web of scandals and lead to a complete implosion of trust. Glenn lays out five theories that could explain Trump’s frustration over the Epstein files and why Glenn may never talk about the Epstein case again. Plus, Glenn connects the dots between the Russiagate hoax, the Hunter Biden laptop cover-up, and the Steele dossier related to the FBI’s new “grand conspiracy” probe. It all leads to one James Bond-like villain: former CIA Director John Brennan. Then, Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA operations officer, tells Glenn why he believes his former boss Brennan belongs in prison and what must happen to prevent a full-blown trust implosion in American institutions.