RADIOMarch 14, 2023

Glenn: Be ‘healthily’ TERRIFIED of the coming banking CHAOS

‘I don’t think people understand the destruction that is coming our way,’ Glenn says. ‘This is going to happen. It’s just a matter of when.’ In this clip, Glenn is joined by financial expert and author of ‘The War On Small Business,’ Carol Roth. They discuss the recent Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) closure, why it occurred, and how small entrepreneurs have to ‘play by the [banking] rules,’ whereas big businesses do not. Plus, Glenn explains why he thinks Americans should be terrified of what’s to come…terrified in a ‘healthy way,' of course.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Carol Roth, welcome back.

CAROL: Hi, Glenn. What a crazy couple of days here, never -- never ceases to amaze. Doesn't it?

GLENN: No, it -- it really doesn't.

First of all, let me get your reaction. We spoke on Friday. On the Friday exclusive, that I do for the Blaze TV.

And this story was just breaking.

CAROL: Yes. Correct.

GLENN: So they bailed everything out, with the FDIC.

But this isn't just the depositors, that they bailed out.

I'm for FDIC, covering depositors. But they just changed the law, with a stroke of a pen. Did they not?

I mean, you had $400 million in that bank. It says clearly on the door, deposits up to 250,000.

CAROL: Yeah. You know, I have a different take on this, than a lot of people that I've been talking to. Some friends and colleagues.

You know, they did not do what I would consider to be a full bank bailout. They did not protect the shareholders. They showed management the door. So, you know, the people who should be taking on risk, took on the risk. In terms of the depositors. I mean, you could say, oh, why should these tech companies be saved?

But I challenge people to change the name. If it wasn't called Silicon Valley Bank. If it was called the small business bank of Iowa, would you want those small businesses to be at risk?

GLENN: Well, there is -- there is a difference.

In those small businesses. And I'll tell you what the difference is. There's no way in hell, this federal government would bail out a small business bank, in a red state. I just don't believe it.

PAT: That may be the case. But at the same time, if you think about the potential contagion.

And, in fact, we could use this now as a benchmark. To say they've done it before. That God forbid, the small business bank of red state were to fail in the future.

But if you think about just the ripple effects, the example I like to use is Etsy.

Etsy is a marketplace. Where artisans and small entrepreneurs do crafts. And they sell them. Etsy had all of their working -- or not all of their capital. A large portion of their capital with Silicon Valley Bank.

So if that money were to have gone away, they wouldn't have been able to pay all of the entrepreneurs.

The same thing with a payroll company. They had their money with Silicon Valley Bank. And so another company wouldn't have been able to pay their entrepreneurs.

So that kind of reverberation throughout the system. And then not quelling the fears, that this could happen again, and potentially taking down not just other regional banks, but having contagions up to big banks. It would have been really bad for everyone.

GLENN: So, but wait.

I agree with you. I agree with you, that it would have been horrendous. Okay?

However, I had under the FDIC limit in Silicon Valley Bank for one of my businesses.

We ran our payroll through Silicon Valley Bank.

CAROL: Okay.

GLENN: We never put more than 250 grand in that. We never do it. Unless we care to lose it.

So why do I have to play by the rules, and expect that I'm not going to get something, but all of the big guys, will always expect, oh, well, they're going to bail me out. I'm too big to lose. I'm too big to fail.

CAROL: Yeah. Listen. This is sort of an expectation sort of game. But the reality is, that we didn't want to have that failure happen. And this was a bank that was very different than some of the other failures that had happened before.

I mean, this was not about making to their I can do loans or derivative products. This was really a liquidity issue, that should have never gotten to the panic. And I think that's the bigger issue. The way this was communicated.

The hubris. The fact that the head of Silicon Valley Bank. Sat on the board of directors, on the San Francisco fed. And didn't anticipate, that it might not be a good idea to lock up money for ten years of treasury.

There are a lot of really weird questions here.

And I think we can certainly debate, you know, what -- what we should do on a go-forward basis. But we have to have faith in the banking system, and for companies to take their cash management and now have to go through paperwork. And chop it up into little blocks so that they can be covered. And have it in all kinds of different banks and different accounts. Isn't particularly efficient.

So I think the insurance program, probably needs to be relooked at. And I think that's --

GLENN: But you can't just write the rules as you go.
(laughter)

CAROL: They do all the time, Glenn.

GLENN: That's wrong. I know. And it's wrong to do that.

CAROL: This is not the first time.
(laughter)
So it's definitely wrong to do that, but they're going to do it on an ongoing basis. This was not the time to put the flag down and go, no. This isn't the time to do it. It was a very sort of practical decision. Yes, in principle, we need to fix the underlying system.

But as I said, let's not pretend that capitalism in the United States. We've had the fed who is --

GLENN: Oh, no, it's not capitalism.

CAROL: On a historic basis. So I won't sit and complain, oh, this is some affront to capitalism, that didn't actually exist.

GLENN: No. The Fed is completely out of control. Overstepped. And all of the -- you know, the big banks. The really big banks.

They are rolling with our cash.

CAROL: Rolling in dough. Literally.

GLENN: Yeah. So let me go back to the bonds, a second.

They locked these treasuries up for ten years. And they -- when the interest rates go up, they lost about 25 percent on their bonds. If they tried to sell them in an emergency.

They were going to lose 25 cents on the dollar.

That's what caused the panic.

Because if you lose 25 cents on the dollar, you don't have enough to cover all of the things that you have covered.

CAROL: Let me add one more thing that added into the panic, because this was on paper.

Should they held them to maturity, there would have been no problem.

Like you said, only in an emergency. What happened, is that within Silicon Valley, because interest rates were rising and the bank was only paying a small amount on deposits, you could pull your money out. And park it into a Treasury bill now. And get, you know, 5 percent without very long duration.

So you had more depositors pulling their money out, than they had model and had expected, in this rising interest rate environment. As well as probably companies that needed more operating cash because of the economy.

So they didn't have that expectation.

And that sort of mismatch, in saying, oh, wait. We have a liquidity need. Because we didn't estimate for this.

That's what forced them to sell the bonds. At that loss.

And then created this panic.

GLENN: And that's where this boob, that is sitting on the Federal Reserve Board, in San Francisco.

These guys are -- I'm convinced, these guys are arrogant morons.

However, how many other banks have put their -- their money into longer term treasuries?

CAROL: Oh, I mean. It's throughout the system.

GLENN: So wait.

CAROL: Wait. Wait. Wait.

GLENN: Go ahead.

CAROL: If you take Bank of America. They also had a situation, where they had to take a big loss on selling treasuries.

The difference is they have a large and diversified business. They only had 69 percent of their liabilities being deposits. Where Silicon Valley bank it was 89 percent. They have a lot of retail deposits, that were under the threshold. They have investment trading. And wealth management. And all these other things.

So for them, it wasn't an issue. But on a smaller scale, for a bank, that really does rely on that deposit business. And because they had so much of that, as these smaller business deposits, that were uninsured, that made it different, than it was for let's say some of these bigger banks or banks that were --

GLENN: Right. But, you know, I'm looking at banks, like, you know, JP Morgan Chase.

All of that. They're fine.

They have plenty of money. And they're going to get all the depositors, as the little banks go out.

CAROL: Exactly. Let's underscore that point.

GLENN: What I'm asking you is: How -- what gives us any indication that this is -- that it's over?

That we're safe now? I mean, it might be because right now.

But this is going to happen again.

CAROL: So that's exactly why they put out the press release, that they did. You know, the fed and the Treasury.

And that very comforting statement from our president. I'm sure that gave you all the confidence in the world.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. I'm stuffed.

CAROL: But that was the point. Is the reason that those depositors pulled out their deposits, is because they were worried it wasn't going to be backstopped. And if there was this liquidity issue that was incurred. Oh, boy. What are we going to do?

Yes. There are other banks that are probably in the same situation. But if their customers don't panic and pull their deposits, and they have the time to pull the liquidity poll.

Then that's what that statement was meant to do.

Now, it really just depends on the temperament of individuals and businesses. If you believe that, if you believe they'll step in and back us up, then you're not pulling out the money, these companies -- the banks can deal with it.

And if you don't, then we will see more of this. Certainly, I think particularly Silicon Valley Bank was different than Silvergate and Signature that had more crypto exposure.

I would imagine those that have more exposure to crypto will probably see some additional issues.

But Silicon Valley Bank being that second largest bank to fail in history, one of the top 20 banks in the US. Systemically important.

As you said, plugged in and connected. It was just a different -- a bit of a different animal.

But, Glenn, I do want to go to that point you made.

This is really huge. Just like they closed down the small businesses during COVID. And all of that went over to the big guys.

You know, the big guys couldn't really step in. There's laws in place, about buying more deposits.

But what has happened in letting this play out, the way it does, is people have just decided to organically move their deposits. So JPMorgan and Citigroup. Like, they're having a field day. So much so, that Jamie Dimon just bought something like 26 million dollars' worth of JPMorgan stock. Because she's doubling down, because he knows all those depositors are rolling in. And he did not have to pay a red cent for them. The great consolidation continues.

GLENN: All right. Hang on just a second. Can you spend the hour with me?

CAROL: Yeah, of course!

GLENN: Because I've got a ton of questions on this.

We'll come back in just a second. Certain kind of person out there, and you know them when you see them.

One that fits in the category of above and beyond. Somebody who is -- they usually just love their job, and they love serving people.

They love to see their customers really, really happy.

Those are the kinds of people that we look for, when we're looking for real estate agents, that can represent you, when you're buying or selling your home. You need somebody who really loves serving you, who has compassion for people. And cares about people. And wants to do the best for them.

That's also the best way to make money. Best way to be successful is just to serve and overserve your customer.

Because they're -- they always go away happy. And then you've got more customers coming your way. We look for the people like that, who also have the best track record.

And they meet our standards. And we have pretty high standards to recommend. These people don't work for us. So we don't have any skin in the game, on, you know, who we pick and who we don't. Other than, I want to super serve you, and give you the best person.

RealEstateAgentsITrust.com. Is a referral service. Just go there. Tell us where you're buying, selling. And we'll get you some of the best real estate agents in the country.

RealEstateAgentsITrust.com. Ten-second station ID.
(music)
Okay.

So as the -- as the Fed rate goes up, these Treasuries are worth less and less. If you have to sell them. Correct?

Wait. We're missing you. Hang on just a second. I don't --

CAROL: Okay. Did you get it? Yeah. So, you know, obviously, the -- not to get too wonky. But the interest rates, or the yield on the bonds trades an inverse on it. And if you think about it, why would you buy a ten-year that was on the market from a long time ago, that's yielding 1.1 something percent interest, when you can buy something that's at two years right now, that gives you 5 percent interest. That doesn't make any sense.

So their current value on the market is lower. Again, if you hold them to maturity, if they hold them to 10 years, you still get the full amount of the face value, plus, the interest. It's just the tradable value today, in that interim time period. Because there's not a lot of demand for that.

GLENN: Right.

So for any small bank that is holding these, if there's trouble, they could be in trouble just like Silicon Valley Bank.

Now, the FDIC, we were told, you know, that's the insurance.

And he said, we're -- don't worry. You don't have to worry about it.

The banks that paid into it.

Well, they don't have enough just to cover what they covered yesterday. So they're already upside down.

So that means, if we do have runs in the bank, in the future, you know, near future.

They don't have any money. Which leads me to believe, we will just print the money.

Doesn't -- I mean, the inflation rate of what we're doing is crazy. Is this the beginning of the currency death cycle?

CAROL: Well, the currency death cycle began a long time ago.

I would say a couple of things. From an FDIC standpoint. They are saying, we are going to put a fee out to other banks.

So when Joe Biden comes out and says, the taxpayers aren't paying for this. You aren't paying for it directly.

But you certainly will be, whether it's a lower interest read on your money, or more fees or whatnot, if all the other banks have to go in.

What I do think can happen here, in the meantime, is, you know, with the bank, they're trying to sell off pieces of it.

And they're trying to find new homes for it. So the FDIC is covering it. Its insurance, if it needs to make it whole. But if somebody else were to buy it or buy other assets. There's a way that that structure sort of happens. And obviously, that's the best-case scenario.

And again, frankly we just should have never gotten to the point, where we had this panic. But, you know, the idiots didn't prevail there.

You know, should there be a God forbid, wide run?

Yes. And in terms of trying to dissolve this would-be money printing. Again, if I can respond.

Some people did not like what I had to say. That's sort of my point.

Someone is saying -- I'm not paid by anybody. I'm saying, we wanted to stem this, because what would happen to everybody.

People who are not involved at all, would have cost you a lot more than this, you know, kind of temporary pin here.

GLENN: I don't think people understand the destruction that is coming our way. It's coming.

This is going to happen. It's just a matter of when.

And people are like, you know, I'm fine. Bring it on.

No. You really don't understand.

You should be in a healthy way, terrified of what's coming. And I use the word terrified.

Do you remember, our grandparents went through something, that they were 50 years away from.
And they were still like, it could happen at any time.

That's the kind of pain that America is about to go through. And remember, those people grew up without indoor toilets. Okay?

They grew up without all the fancy stuff that we have now.

They didn't have that far to fall back.

We have an enormous way to go back.

You should be terrified of it.

In a healthy way.

For a Night, We Were Human | The Christmas Truce Music Video

In the frozen trenches of World War I along the Lys River in 1914, amidst the relentless thunder of artillery, a miraculous unofficial truce unfolded on Christmas Day. British and German soldiers, weary enemies, emerged from the mud and wire to share gifts, songs, and stories of home together in the ruins. Produced by Glenn Beck in collaboration with AI, this poignant music video and original song recapture the true story of the Christmas Truce, reminding us that even in the darkest times, a single brave act or small light can awaken our shared humanity, allowing soldiers to lay down their weapons and remember they are human... just for a night.

Stay tuned at GlennBeck.com for more musical storytelling inspired by Glenn’s artifacts next year on Torch.

The HIDDEN history behind Trump’s controversial Rob Reiner comments

President Trump recently received heat from his own party over his comments about the allegedly murdered actor Rob Reiner. Glenn Beck explains why he believes Trump’s comments were not a good move, but also tells of a meeting he had with Trump that he believes explains why Trump hates TDS so much…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I don't -- I don't -- I don't want to get into -- into the mix with everybody and personalities. I like -- my goal is to make things about right and wrong, and not about personalities.

But I do want to spend just a second on President Trump's post yesterday about Rob Reiner. It made me sad. It made me really sad. Because I like the president.

And -- and he doesn't help himself when he does things like this. But I think I understand this in a different way.

You know, the President has said, you know, all kinds of things about me at times when I disagree with him. He'll say, "Oh, he's just a failing fat blob," or whatever. And that's just him. That's just the way -- when he's in a fight, he is a -- he's a knife fighter. And I get it. I don't like it. But I get it. This was different. This was different.
And this was -- you know, you can say a lot of stuff politically about Rob Reiner. But politics didn't matter yesterday. We weren't -- I mean, that's not -- it just didn't matter. It didn't matter.

But I think to the President, it does. I saw a change in the President -- I've seen two changes in the President. I've seen a change in him when they started going after him and his family. After 2020. And they really started going after his family. And we know this because we showed you the documents. What they -- they had a plan. Take him down.

Take his family down to stop MAGA at all costs. Put them in jail. I mean, those are their words.

And it's -- it was frightening to read.

And I talked to the president, I don't know. Maybe six months after, you know, we were in 2021. Maybe six months. Eight months.

And I said, how are you holding up?

And he had talked a little about how he felt. He had really let people down because he had things going in the right direction. And now, look at it, and look how screwed up things are going to get. And how the economy is going to be damn near impossible to fix. It will take us time. But we can't fix it. Pragmatism, but they've just destroyed it. And I said, how are you personally.

How are you holding up?

And this is the first change I saw. He -- his body changed. And he said, they're going after my damn children!

And it was this Dad. All of a sudden, he wasn't the president or former president, he wasn't Donald Trump. He was a Dad. And it was every Dad response in him. And he said, "You don't go after our children."

And I saw him really, truly mad for the very first time, and it was righteous indignation.

Then after he was shot, I saw another change. I saw him recognize that God existed. I mean, I know he believed that in God. I don't know that he believed that God was actually part of, you know, the story. The everyday story. You know, I don't know how he views God in that way.

But I know that he recognized that God was in his -- in the story of America now.

Firsthand, he witnessed it. The reason why I said this made me sad yesterday, is because -- I don't agree with what he said. I feel -- it was -- it was sad.

Because he is -- he has been kicked in the head over and over and over again by some of these people, that he -- Christmas is about the baby Jesus coming again.

And what he can do in your life. And the biggest thing that he taught was, love your enemies. Don't hate them. But that's really, really hard to do. And the President isn't there yet. On this. And it -- it made me sad. How did you feel about it, Stu?

STU: I didn't like it at all. I think maybe the same as you. You know, one of the things that bothered me about it.

Because you hit many of the points that I had on it without the personal insight that is illustrative of -- of -- of what he's going through. I think there is something to understand there. You know, obviously I --

GLENN: Big time.

STU: One of the things that is difficult about life in your attempt to master it is to try to act the right way, even when you're faced with circumstances like that. And, you know, I get it. I get why he's angry and doesn't like the guy. The man -- you used a phrase, I think in there, where you said, he's a knife fighter. This guy was actually just in a legitimate knife fight and was murdered. It was a -- it was -- this actually really happened.

GLENN: Oh, yeah.

STU: And, look, my honest opinion is, it's indefensible. You know, I like President Trump. I think he does a lot of great things for the country. We've defended him on a lot of different things. A lot of times when he's being attacked, I think he deserves defense. In this case, you know, it is -- you know, it is what it is.

It is priced in to everyone's understanding of who Donald Trump is. And everything I heard about him in personal situations where he cares about the person. Is that he's very generous. He's very likable.

He's very -- he's one of those people that you like being around. You know, that is something that I've heard from tons of people. This part of him is really hard for me to square with what I've heard from -- from other -- from everybody that I've talked to, and has been on the inside with him.

And so I don't -- I don't have a defense for it. I think it's really bad. And I will say one more thing on this real quickly, Glenn.

I know a part of this that I think is difficult. In that, one of the things I took from the aftermath of that immediately was -- I don't know if pride is the right word. But like, I really liked the way conservatives responded to it.

We didn't do what they did, after Charlie Kirk.

We didn't do what they did after they shot the president. Right?

Like we -- they celebrated it. They -- they were horrible human beings, and I enjoyed the high ground, that we had there.

GLENN: Yeah. Me too.

STU: And it's difficult to make the argument that we have the high ground. When, you know, the President of the Republican Party. The Republican President of the United States, the most high profile person on, quote, unquote, our side, whatever that means these days, is a guy who, you know, kind of did some of the things that they did.

You know, so I don't -- I don't like that. I understand as part of Donald Trump. And I think if we're all adults here, we're able to kind of price that in and judge him on everything that he's doing. And when I mean pricing in. I think that's a negative part of him. Overall, you have to take everything into context.

GLENN: Right. And if we're all adults here, you know, we should be able to say, to those we love and respect, bad move. I didn't like that. Don't do that.

And I think, you know, I think because the left always says, well, you never take on your own.

Yes, we do. We take on our own, all the time. All the time. And I think it's important that we say, didn't like that. Thought that was a bad move. It didn't look good. It just wasn't right.

He's -- I wish -- and, again, though, I -- I'm not excusing it, but I am tempering it with none of us have gone through what he has gone through.

STU: So true.

GLENN: His family, somebody is shooting at him. He's being called fascist Hitler all the time. I mean, that wears on you and changes you.

And, you know, he's having a hard time forgiving that. And I kind of understand that. I wish he would take that on and take on the forgiveness, so he could be more a peacemaker in all of those things. But that is his own personal journey.

But --

STU: Yeah. And I think when we talk about like a terrible crime that's occurred.

GLENN: Sad.

STU: Like, I don't know. If there was -- think about some awful situation and at times you'll see -- he'll hear family members say the worst possible thing.

You know, if your kid is murdered. And by some -- somewhat of a particular area or group or whatever.

And they might react with just an awful thing about that group or area.

And you just. We all have a bit of understanding. Right?

A person going through a massively emotional thing.

And lashing out.

You want -- you know, the example you bring up all the time, Glenn.

Of the maybe -- the ultimate example of being able to have restraint was the Amish situation from years ago. Where, you know, you were talking about mass murder. And they were to the family's house that night, right?

And saying, we --

GLENN: Not that night. That afternoon.

I mean, within an hour. The kids were not even out of the schools yet. Their bodies were still laying in the school. And the Amish went, oh, my gosh. The killer is dead too.

He was a member of our community. His wife lives here.

What is she feeling? She's feeling completely alone. My gosh. What an example. I couldn't do that.

STU: Right. I don't even think I come close to that standard in that moment.

GLENN: No. But I would like to.

STU: That's the range. Some people act -- react really well. Some people react really poorly.

And I think we all understand the emotion and everything that takes over in a situation like that. And that has to be factored in, I think, to Trump. Of course, Rob Reiner wasn't responsible to the shooting. He was just a liberal who said bad things about Trump. And look, he's a very unique person. And a very unique situation, that I don't think anyone in the world has ever experienced.

You know, what happened with him over his life.

But may I just say, you still haven't forgiven RFK Jr for what he said about me.
(laughter)
Okay?

STU: As I said, I'm not Amish. You know, I like technology. I don't have any wagons. I didn't say I'm perfect.

GLENN: Right.

STU: No. I have -- I have -- I have absolutely forgiven RFK Jr for what he said. And if you didn't know, he accused Glenn of being a traitor. He said, he should be charged with treason. The penalty of which is death.

So, you know, I don't like that. And RFK Jr. I don't like for a lot of his policies. Some of them, by the way, I do really like. Some of them, I think are really positive. I could give you a list of some of the negative things he's done as well.

GLENN: I can too.

STU: That doesn't mean -- I certainly was find that to be an appropriate context, when the embrace of RFK Jr is occurring.

I think we need to understand what people are, and what they're doing. If he's apologetic about that, I do forgive him in that sense. Do I want him on the show and promoting all his books and his candidacy?

No. I did not -- I did not like that. But, you know, a lot of people do. I will say is, you're right, though.

We all have our hang-ups.

GLENN: I do. I certainly was.

STU: I will say this, though.

And, you know, again, all the context here. I know people are really defensive of Donald Trump, appropriately.

Because of the fact that he's targeted unfairly. I understand why people are defensive of him. I can tell you this. I really don't like RFK Jr.

He's one of my least favorite people in politics. I'm just not a fan. I could give you other names of people. Most of them revolve around Olivia Nuzzi, who whatever. I don't have feelings about her. But the story was packed with people.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Cuomos for sure.
GLENN: Yeah.

STU: God forbid, one of these people that I really don't like, was murdered and his family and his spouse.

I can promise you. I can promise you, I will not be tweeting anything like what Donald Trump tweeted.

That is just a -- is a -- is a situation where I understand -- I understand the context around it, that we just discussed.

I don't think there's a defense to it. I think there's something, I really hope he has an awakening to at some point.

GLENN: I think that is enough to be said on that.

Now maybe we should examine ourselves, and say, where do we have that hardness in our heart that we should learn from and remove this holiday season?

Why America's "Surveillance State" Has Proven to be a TOTAL Failure

America is facing a shocking security breakdown—from a mass shooting at one of the most heavily surveilled campuses in the United States to a deadly ISIS attack in Syria that exposes the cracks in U.S. intelligence and foreign-policy strategy. As surveillance systems fail, former extremists gain power abroad, and radical Islamist networks globalize their reach, the West is confronting a threat both inside and outside its borders. This episode uncovers the uncomfortable truth behind Brown University’s unanswered questions, Syria’s escalating instability, and why the West may be running out of time to get its own house in order.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I wanted to bring Jason in -- I wanted to bring Jason in because the news that we talked about a minute ago in Australia, then Brown.

There's some weird stuff happening with the Brown shooting. And we -- we don't know much about that. And also, Syria. So let me start with Brown University, Jason. Why is this one weird, as our chief researcher, why is this one weird?

JASON: Well, there comes a point where, you know, as a society, we just end up getting used to the massive surveillance state we live in. And I think we're just like, okay. Fine.

We're never not going to be surveilled 24/7. Maybe there's some benefits to it.

Well, no!

It doesn't seem that way. Because the people were asking the people at Brown. Like, how is it that you have not fully identified the shooter yet? And that's a very good question. Because if you go back to around 2021, there were people writing about how Brown University was one of the most surveilled campuses of the United States.

GLENN: How is it we only have one picture of this guy from the back?

JASON: Right!

GLENN: Apparently the one thing that will help you get away with any crime is a hoodie.

JASON: Yeah. Wear something over your head and a coat.

Apparently, that foils the entire surveillance state. Also, we have nothing to worry about with surveillance. I don't know.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. Right.

JASON: And on top of that, Kash Patel, the FBI director said that they sprung into action. And they activated their cellular monitoring system to help identify the person that has now been let go. Again, that's another layer of this surveillance state that I think a lot of us have been worried about.

And that didn't do anything either. That helped give us the wrong suspect? What is all this stuff for?

It's not keeping us safe, that's for sure.

GLENN: Hmm. I don't want to jump to any conclusions on, you know, what we have, what we don't have. I'm assuming that they have more. They just haven't shown it.

I would like to -- you know, we could help. You show us some pictures.

I think it's odd.

What happened in Syria over the weekend with al-Qaeda.

JASON: Yeah. In Syria.

There's a ton of news, especially involving ISIS, who is very much active and still very much planning attacks.

GLENN: So wait. Wait. Wait. Was this ISIS, or was this al-Qaeda?

JASON: This is ISIS. That's what they're saying. They're saying it's a lone ISIS perpetrator. The location was symbolic as well. The location as in or around Palmyra. Which, I don't know if you remember, that was a scene of a gruesome ISIS video back at the height of their caliphate, where they behead a lot of people in that area.

GLENN: Right. Right. Yes. That's where they lined them up in the orange jumpsuits. Remember everybody was kneeling down in the sand. And they started beheading people. Yes, I remember.

JASON: It was one of those UNESCO sites with ruins all around. And it was very crazy. Brutal video. But another brutal attack. I believe it was three US service members that were killed in this attack. There's a lot of speculation about to go, on if this person was working. I think he was actually at a time working with the security services that are in Syria right now, under the new president. He -- he could have been, you know, a sleeper in that organization. Who knows? But for -- the one thing I do know. And I don't understand the direction we're moving in Syria. I don't understand how a former al-Qaeda guy suddenly is an all right guy because he puts a suit on. And now he's the president of Syria. And he's our ally.

I don't understand that. The Trump administration, maybe they have more information, that I don't know.

I would love to get more of an explanation on this.

As of now, I don't see this going any direction other than a whole lot worse.

You look around that entire area. You have a former al-Qaeda guy now the president of Syria.

You have the rest of Syria, an absolute Dumpster fire. You have Iraq. I hesitate to call these countries.

They're so far down the sectarian, you know, spiral that this is.

But I don't see how this is going to go anywhere, but south, from here on out.

We're in an absolute war with these radical Islamists. And it's not just in the Middle East. It's globalize the intifada has landed on shores all over the world. And while there are politicians that will not denounce that. That is exactly what's happening. Sorry!

GLENN: So I think that's where -- I think that's what -- that explains Trump's thinking. That Trump does not want these everlasting wars to go on.

He does not want to be fighting in the Middle East. He doesn't want to really be fighting anywhere. He will, if he has to. But he's focused more on the American homeland. And the American hemisphere.

And so I think he is -- I think he's letting the Middle East take care of itself.

And as long as they can all get along with each other and Israel.

And recognize that, you know, Iran and the -- the -- the al-Qaeda, the, you know, Muslim Brotherhood. Et cetera, et cetera.

Trying to coax them all into. Hey. These are kind of your enemies here.

You know, ISIS is a big enemy to us and to peace.

And I think he's hoping that they will start to take care of themselves. Whether they will or not, I don't know. You know, it's never happened were. But it's worth trying. We've been playing this other game of us getting involved in everything for 100 years. We know that doesn't work.

So I'm guessing what Trump is thinking is, we know that doesn't work. We're not going to do that. Let's try to give peace a chance, and help them stomp this out, because it will be prosperous for all of them and plant those seeds as deeply as you can to see what happens. But we're not getting involved in any of that. I have a feeling, but there will be a military response to this, I'm sure. Won't you agree?

JASON: Oh, one hundred percent, and to tack on to what you're saying, I would hope that the President would go with his gut on this.

Because the previous ways this has been handled with Islamists, especially in this area. They've screwed it up.

They don't know what they're doing. Although, they think they know what they're doing. I'll go back to history. The Iran and Iraq War. We supported both size on that. In a similar -- in a similar strategy. So we're like, okay. We don't like either one of these groups. Sectarian groups to get too large. Let's fund this country at the same time we fund this country. We'll arm them. They'll fight each other, and they'll be fine. We do that all the time.

So now, the only thing I can think of is that's what they're thinking with the Syria president, this former al-Qaeda guy. Okay. Well, fine. They'll be anti-Iran, so they can counter Iran.

It's literally the same exact strategy, that they're going for. And I get it. That means that we don't have to get involved. I guess in the initial point.

But we always end up having to get involved after the fire erupts and --

GLENN: We know -- look, I think he's trying to buy time, quite honestly. Get us out of that.

Let us recover, and hopefully not go back to it. Try to buy hopefully some real peace.

But we all know how this will end. It's never going to work in the long-term. Because we as the West have to concentrate on our own homelands. You're seeing that with what happened in Australia. We have let the barbarian into the gates. And we've got to focus on that. We've got to get this cancer, cut out of our own societies. Because it's not good.

Why Biden's Corrupt Pardons CANNOT Stand... And Why it STILL Matters!

A new wave of sweeping “pardons” has triggered one of the most urgent constitutional alarms Glenn Beck has ever raised — not because the individuals involved are controversial, but because the actions themselves may not even qualify as pardons at all. Glenn Beck breaks down how these broad, immunity-style declarations can bypass investigations, rewrite laws by fiat, and push executive power into territory the Founders explicitly warned against. With mass clemency increasingly used as a political shield and executive actions replacing the legislative process, America is drifting toward a model of governance that no longer resembles a constitutional republic. This episode exposes how the pardon power is being stretched beyond recognition, why Congress has surrendered its role as a check, and what must happen before the nation crosses a point of no return. The question now is unavoidable: Who will stop this before the Constitution becomes optional?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

CALLER: I wanted to talk about the pardons. Hunter's pardon was legitimate. He was actually accused of a crime. I know you're plugged in with the president. I haven't heard anybody say this anywhere. I have been watching everything.

These pardons. Forget the auto-pen. The auto-pen doesn't even matter. Because these were immunity deals. These were not pardons. None of these people were under investigation. None of these people had any crimes they were accused of.

So you can't pardon somebody for something they may have or may not have done. That's an immunity deal.

Again, I've watched everything. I don't hear anybody bring that stuff -- I don't think the auto-pen matters. I just think those things are null and void from the jump.

GLENN: Who --

CALLER: Like I said.

GLENN: Who do we have besides Mike Lee? Because Mike is always hard to get a hold of at this time. He's like, I'm working on Senate stuff, Glenn.

Who do we have that is a Constitutional scholar that we can call real quick, and see if we can get an answer on that before the end of the show? At least put a call out to Mike Lee, will you?

But I would like to know that happen at that. Because the president has. And Stu and I have talked about this for a while. This has gotten out of control. These pardons are out of control. Out of control.

It's something Constitutional. It's been there since George Washington. The President has always had this right, and it's a privilege of his. But you're right.

These things where, wait. I can't investigate this? What that does is if you're as a president doing something that you shouldn't be doing, all you have to do then is say, I pardon everyone in my administration for anything that they might have done wrong.

That can't stand. You're absolutely right on that.

STU: Yeah. You have the immunity deal. Which again, I think is -- I don't see -- I don't see how a pre-pardon is even possibly covered.
Like, it's just such an insane concept.

The way that Biden. He's right that Hunter Biden actually committed a crime and pardoning him from that in theory, obviously, outside the family interest was the way that that was supposed to work.

But they also pardoned him for multiple years of question marks, whether he committed crimes or not. Right? That was all included on that.

To go a step farther on this, I am on a bit of a personal jihad against the pardon. I'm done with it. I'm done with it personally. There's reasons the Founders were very, very smart. But the Founders were smart enough to also have a process for Constitutional amendments. And I would support one, getting rid of the part in power completely. I'm done with it.

GLENN: Wait, may I just interrupt for a second. I just want to point out. We now have verification, not only is Stu a Canadian spy, but he's also a hidden Nazi. Noticed the word he used, jihad, which translates to my struggle. Hitler's book, My Struggle, Mein Kampf. I just want to point it out.

JASON: Exposed.

STU: Just to be clear, I'm not planning a genocide on the power of pardons.

But I'm against it, strongly. But the other part I would say that I think is every worse and is never discussed, are these types of pardons where they say, you know, all marijuana crimes. They're -- everyone -- there are 17,000 people.

That is just you legislating. If I wanted to New Jersey and say, hey.

I think marijuana should be legal. I could theoretically be president.

Saying, everyone convicted of a marijuana-related crime is now pardoned.

And that's just you making laws. It's you going completely around Congress. And the entire process we have there.

At the very least. It should be massively restricted from the way it's being utilized. Not only -- several presidents in a row, I would argue.

But it's -- it should just -- I think it should just go away completely. It's the most king-like power the president has. And it doesn't make any sense to me.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

So I'm looking this up here.

Barack Obama did this.

He gave clemency for anybody who was convicted of a non-violent federal drug crime.

With no significant criminal history, while serving extraordinarily long sentences. And anybody who was a violent offender was not eligible.

And it was -- it wasn't a -- a true mass pardon. But it was pretty close to it. You know, it was -- it was mass in scale, but not blanketed.

STU: Right.

GLENN: And I think there were like 2,000 people that he parted on that.

STU: It was a law. Creating a new law.

GLENN: Yeah. You're saying, oh, by the way. That law that I personally disagree with.

We're not going to -- it's gone.

STU: The whole law doesn't count at him. We have a whole process to make laws. When someone -- when they pass a law, you can't say, eh. And shrug your shoulders. And say, I don't particularly like it.

And for some reason, that's the way the pardon power has been translated.

GLENN: The problem is the President can. The President has just always had the restraint not to do that.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Because it was bad for the country. And bad for laws.

You know, you don't just -- you don't do this. We're becoming more and more of a king. In our administration.

And it's not Donald Trump.

This has been about to go for a long time.

Barack Obama I think got really, really bad.

But this was going on before him. Obviously.

But Barack Obama kind of set something off.

And then because we couldn't get any legislation passed. We had Donald Trump try to do executive orders, to combat Barack Obama's executive orders.

Then Biden did it. And Trump. It's got to stop.

Because here's the problem. One of the things I said in our special on Wednesday.

Which was, biggest stories of the year.

And predictions for next year. I said, you will start to see rolling brownouts in places like Texas in 2026. Texans, wake up. Wake up.

But you're going to start to see rolling brownouts. But I also made another prediction. And I've just lost what I was going to say was the prediction.

Oh!

This massive swing. We're getting whiplash.

You can't -- you can't run a country like this.

You can't run a country where it's all being done by executive order.

Because look, we were all the way over to one side. When Trump was here. Then we swung way farther than that. With Biden.

Now Trump is bringing us back this way. If you don't pass laws, it's just going to swing.

And you can't -- you can't run a country like that.

This has got to stop!

We have to pass laws. Congress must do its job.