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.

Why Jim Acosta’s AI Parkland victim “interview” is GROTESQUE

Former CNN host Jim Acosta recently “interviewed” an AI-generated depiction of Parkland shooting victim Joaquin Oliver. Glenn Beck calls the stunt dystopian and sick, asking: “What does it truly mean to be alive if, in death, you’re more useful?”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So here's a story that I think, if we don't stop and pay attention to right now, just one small story, it may seem like something small. But if we don't pay attention to it right now. I don't think we recognize what it means to be human in a generation, from now, if that long. Journalist. I shouldn't say journalist.

Publicity hound Jim Acosta just did an interview -- I can't even say that. Just did -- I don't even know what you would call it.

Did a publicity stunt, not with a witness.
Not a grieving parent. He sat down with an AI ghost.

It's an AI recreation of a 17-year-old kid, named Joaquin Oliver. He was murdered in the Parkland Massacre.

And then he called it journalism. He called it a conversation, but it wasn't.

It was neither!

It was -- it wasn't even human. Let me play this grotesque pantomime for you. Listen.

VOICE: Joaquin, I would like to know, what your solution would be for gun violence.

VOICE: Great question. I believe in a mix of stronger gun control laws, mental health support, and community engagement. We need to create safe spaces for conversations and connections, making sure everyone feels seen and heard.

It's about building a culture of kindness and understanding; what do you think about that?

VOICE: I think that's a great idea, Joaquin.
(laughter)

STU: That is the worst thing I've ever seen in my life. I had -- I had seen all the headlines. I hadn't actually seen the...
(laughter)

GLENN: Now, it is so --

STU: Sorry.

GLENN: It's so bad, it's funny, at this point. Right? It's just horrible.

I want to put this into perspective: This is a digital ventriloquist act. He's a puppet. It's the image of a dead kid, long buried, animated. Like a puppet, for the politics of those who are still living.

Now, let me ask you something, that, you know, we haven't dared to ask out loud yet.

And that is, what does it mean?

What his it truly mean to be alive?

In death, you're more useful.

What are the Republicans saying. Or sorry, the Democrats saying right now to some of the people in Congress.

They're saying, you need to take a bullet. Why?

Because you're more useful, if you're dead.

If somebody assassinates you. So what does it mean to be alive, if in death, you're more useful?

What does it mean when your image. Your voice. Your soul as captured by a memory or photograph, can be summoned back again.

Not by God. But by algorithms and agenda.

I hate to go all religious on you. But I have to tell you, if this isn't the making of a graven image, I don't know what is.

Thou shall not making a graven image.

You don't make for yourself an idol or any likeness of what is in heaven, above, or on earth beneath.

You know, the Native Americans used to -- they would never let you take your picture.

Some of them. Some tribes.

They would never let you take your picture. Because they thought it would steal your soul.

This doesn't have a soul. This is taking your image, bringing you back to life, without a soul.

When man starts creating a likeness, to wield power or emotion, we stop serving God. And we start serving ourselves.

And I'm going to be generous here. And say, don't blame the parents.

I don't -- I don't question their grief, in any way, shape, or form.

But this -- this -- this is no longer theirs.

This is not their son. This is a political puppet.

The minute Joaquin's AI avatar spoke political opinions into a camera, it stopped being about grief, and became propaganda!

And this, my friend, is only the beginning.

What happens when governments use AI resurrected faces for propaganda?

What happens when terrorists Use Deepfake hostages?

Hostages who are already dead? Pleading for help?

You don't think that could happen with Hamas?

You don't think that Hamas couldn't have made an image, in fact, the video that we say last week, could have very well been AI.

And the kid could be dead.

Now, it's not. But that's what's coming.

What happens when we begin to trust synthetic testimony, over human -- actual human experience?

This isn't just immoral.

This is very, very dangerous. This is soul-erasing.

This is post-human.

You are entering a world now, that is -- it's post-human!

This is the dystopian world. And we're just beginning to step into it. We're entering an age, where the dead can be programmed, to speak the words of the living.

Where the brief is nothing more than a marketing tool.

Where death is not your end!

But just the data set now, to be parsed and projected. And used politically.

And here's the real sick part of this: The more meaningful your death, the more valuable your ghost.

If that doesn't shake to you your core, nothing is going to.

If this doesn't wake you up to the dangers of AI, nothing will.

If this doesn't wake you up to go, oh, dear God, I've got to get back to the basics, I have to start asking the questions, what does it mean to be human? Nothing will!

We -- we have to draw really strong, ethical hard lines in the sand, on the use of AI. The use of likeness of the dead. It should be codified into law, internationally. And I'm not saying, you know, you're not bringing characters back. You know, you're not bringing -- you're not bringing things back to, you know, show them in movies, or for entertainment or whatever.

But when you're bringing dead children back, I don't know. I think there's a problem here.

There's a problem. We -- and we also have to teach our kids discernment here. Critical thinking.

You know, and more than critical thinking. Moral reasoning has got to be taught.

We need a generation that knows the difference between the real and the artificial.

Between the sacred and the synthetic.

Because that's going to be blurred.

All of it is blurred. How long before a Jim Acosta clown isn't the one doing it, but somebody serious? Transparency, from media. From tech.

Not after the fact. But before the images even appear on the screen.

Now, to his credit, he did say, this was AI. Of course. But it's a ghost!

We have to reawaken the soul, the concept of the soul. This is why I've said for years, that Ray Kurzweil is one of the scariest guys I have ever met. Because he doesn't believe in the soul.

He believes that that -- what you just saw, is just as real, as the real kid.

Some -- the soul can't be copied. It can't be coded.

It can't be commodified.

Because we lose our soul, in our culture.

If we lose it in our -- in our culture, in our politics. In our mourning. In our journalism.

Then you've got nothing left.

And doesn't Joaquin Oliver deserve dignity in life? Everybody knows he deserves peace in death.
Right?

What he didn't deserve, is to be animated by code, to deliver a political message like a branded mascot.

I'm sorry, but if this is the parents' doing, the parents -- the parents, shame on you. Shame on you.

I -- I understand your grief as much as a person can, that hasn't lost a child. I understand your grief, but this is sick.

You know where this road leads? It lees to a future where grief can be licensed.

Where every dead child becomes a campaign.

And where being alive, no longer requires a pulse.

Just a well-trained AI model.

You never die!

That's not compassion. That is not progress. That is hell, wearing the mask of empathy.

Shame on you, Jim Acosta!

Because out of all the people that could have done this, you're only doing it for PR. You're only doing it because you need the attention.

It's sick. And Americans have to stand up and say, no more. You have to at least, in your personal life, make a decision, what is life?

And what is death worth?

How Violent Mobs Took Over the Democratic Party — Expert's Warning!

Glenn Beck talks with Kyle Shideler, homeland security and counterterrorism expert at the Center for Security Policy, about the troubling rise in politically motivated physical attacks coming from the far-left. What truly unites all these groups which have seemingly interests, and what does the Trump administration do to eliminate this growing threat before the problem spirals out of control?

Watch This FULL Episode of Glenn TV HERE

Trump Just Uncovered a MUCH BIGGER Scandal than Russiagate | Glenn TV | Ep 450

For almost a decade, Glenn Beck has tried connecting the dots between Ukraine, Russiagate, the Open Society Foundations, and the weaponization of government under Obama and Biden. Recent revelations from the ODNI disclosure from Tulsi Gabbard and the Durham annex reveal a scandal that goes deeper than Russiagate to expose the full scope of the operation to take out President Trump. Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute and author of "Blood Money," reveals the depth of Hillary Clinton and George Soros' corruption and how it all ties into the Trump Ukraine impeachment. Sean Davis, CEO and co-founder of the Federalist, discusses whether people like former CIA Director John Brennan or even Obama will face justice and what crimes the DOJ could charge them with.

Why Democrats SUDDENLY “care” about gerrymandering

What is gerrymandering? And why are Texas Democrats suddenly screaming about it while ironically fleeing to Illinois, the most gerrymandered state in the nation? Glenn Beck breaks down gerrymandering and why he believes the Texas Democrats don't really care about "justice."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. I want to play a couple of sound bites that came out yesterday.

First of all, let me start here with cut seven. This is a state representative from Texas, Ron Reynolds. He went on CNN.

And said, he wasn't worried about anything that the State of Texas was -- was claiming to do to him, because they were fleeing the state. Because they're on the right side of history. Here's cut seven.

VOICE: I'm not worried about Governor Abbott's threats of going to jail, or a $500 fine, because we're standing on the right side of history, making our own trouble, to fight, to preserve, and protect our democracy. We're on the right side of history. We're not beholden to the MAGA extremists, that are trying to disenfranchise black and brown communities. We're doing everything we can, to protect Texans. And so we're not going to cower to Governor Abbott's attempts to put us into jail. This is worth our democracy. This is not just about Texas. As Dr. King said, injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. This is about protecting our democracy.

Because if they can do it in Texas, they can do it anywhere else. So we're going to stand strong.

We're not going to back down. And we're going to keep pressing forward. To protect every single Texan. So they won't be disenfranchised.

We won't go back to the days of Jim Crow. We will stand up to racial gerrymandering.

GLENN: Okay. This is -- this is crazy.

There's so much there.

I mean, first of all, be really careful when you say you're on the right side of history.
I mean, I don't know about you, but I question all the time. And I think this is really healthy. Am I on the right side of history?

I don't know. I don't know what the answer. History will tell me the answer. Am I on the right side?

Am I -- am I fighting for the things that are right, correct, eternally true, and righteous?

I don't know. I mean, there is so many things that I go back and forth on, that I just don't know.

And I think that's really important to question yourself. So anybody, when they are firm on, you're on the right side of history. And we know. We don't question. We're on the right side of history.

Really? Because you were the ones with ESG. Forcing people to follow these rules like, you know, there's no difference between a man and a woman.

You know, men in women's sports.

Men can have a baby.

Really?

That's not working out well.

You know, that you're on the side that Dr. Martin Luther King was wrong.

That -- that the color of the skin does matter. That was your position. And you said, you were on the right side of history.

I don't think you're on the right side of history won that one. You know, it seems to be falling apart on you. Because now you're quoting Dr. Martin Luther King.

I thought we didn't -- we didn't agree with Dr. Martin Luther King.

I mean, that was your position, two years ago!

So when you're -- when you listen to anybody who says, they're on the right side of history. Be very, very careful.

You know, the one thing that I'm absolutely certain of. 100 percent certain of, is I'm not certain of anything.

The more I learn, the less certain I become, on certain things.

Right side of history, I don't know. I'm going to do my best. And let God sort it out, at the end.

I don't know. And then they say, if they can do this in Texas. If the Republicans can do this in Texas, they can do it anywhere.

They have been doing it everywhere, since 1812!

If you knew the history of gerrymandering, it comes from elder -- or Gerry Elbridge. Right? Gerry Elbridge, I think. Or Elbridge Gerry, that's it. Elbridge Gerry. He was a founding father. 1812, he is the governor, I think of Massachusetts. They start to draw these squiggly lines for the Congressional map. It's later, in the 1840s, called gerrymandering.

But that's how it started. They've been doing it forever. And the worst place, well, I'll get to that here in just a second.

So let me play the second clip here. And that is, on the Don Lemon show. Who knew he still had a show?

Another Texas state rep. Yolanda Jones said this, cut six.

VOICE: Then immigration happened, and everybody thought they accepted this. They don't accept this. They are showing us who they are.

We should believe them. And we better have the courage to stand up. Otherwise, we will follow for anything.

And in this country, we will be defeated, deported. I mean, we will lose all of our rights. And if you think it can't happen. It can. And I will liken this to the Holocaust.

People are like, well, how did the Holocaust happen?

How is anybody in the position to kill all these people?

Well, good people become silent.

Or good people didn't realize, that what happens to them, can very still happen to me and somebody I love.

And so even if you made it, you have an obligation to help people who can't. Because God forbid, they end up targeting you, and your family.

VOICE: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Okay. I agree with everything she said, except what she's applying it to!

How is this the Jerry -- I mean, I think it's a little insulting to those who had relatives stuffed into ovens! To say, that gerrymandering is like the Holocaust!

But maybe that's just me!

But you know what this is all about?

This is all about when a group of people in the government, no longer believe in its own people!

When 57 elected Democrats from Texas, they didn't just walk out on their duties, they walked out on the people.

They fled the state to avoid voting on redistricting maps, they say, are unfair.

They say, they're standing up for democracy. But where did they run?

This tells you a lot in the story. Illinois. New York. Massachusetts.

The states, whose maps are textbook examples of political gerrymandering!

They ran to Massachusetts, where it was -- it was Elbridge Gerry, that gerrymandering is named after, he was the governor of Massachusetts!

They fled to the belly of the beast, while crying wolf back home. So the first thing you need to know, this is not about justice. This is about power. And they are betting that you are too distracted and your friends are too distracted or discouraged to notice.

So let me be clear on what is actually happening here.

GLENN: Okay. So the Department of Justice in Texas. This is what's really happening. They decided that the Texas congressional map violates the Voting Rights Act. Not because it eliminates minority representation. But because it doesn't create coalition districts where different racial groups are lumped together to form artificial minorities.

So what they're saying, in bureaucratic doublespeak is, Texas has to draw maps, that elect Democrats. That's the game.

This is not about race. It's about arithmetic. If a Republican map spreads voters to thin its race, but if a Democratic map does the same to Republicans, it's equity!

That's -- that's not -- that's not the law. That's manipulation. And our Founders talked about this. In Federalist Papers number ten, James Madison warned us of the dangers of factions. Organized groups that put their own interests above the public good, and that's what we're experiencing everywhere.

He said, let me quote: The instability, injustice, and confusion, introduced into the public councils, have been the mortal diseases which popular governments have everywhere perished, end quote.

That's what this is. This is a faction. A political machine. So drunk on power. That it can't even pretend to be consistent, anywhere.

They invoke democracy. And then they run away from their duty to vote. They wear shirts that say, let the people vote. While ignoring votes in New York, that ignore an independent redistricting commission.

This is the rot Madison warned us about. Faction over function. Power over principle.

So let's look at Illinois for a second.

In Illinois, they didn't try to just gerrymander there.

They eradicated the Republicans.

They drew a map, so surgical. So cynical.

That analysts have now said, this is the worst gerrymander in the country!

It's in Illinois.

Republicans, now. I want you to hear this.

Republicans now hold three out of 17 seats.

Okay.

Well, the voters spoke.

Well, did they?

They won over 40 percent of the vote.

40 percent of the vote!

But they only hold three out of 17 seats.

That's not representative.

That's gerrymandering!

And now, Texas Democrats, they're running for cover.

They're hiding behind the very injustice they claim to oppose.

They also don't recognize, that by millions, because of their policies. Millions of people have moved in to Texas.

Since the census.

There is no real representation of -- of the people. Because millions of people have moved in.

So what do we do?

Well, this is something I think you're going to hear me talk about a lot lately. Is look to the future. And rebuild.

First thing we have to do is expose the hypocrisy on this.

Not with shouting. But with actual facts.

You have to use your voice.

You have to first teach what gerrymandering is.

It's legal. Okay. I don't like it.

I wish -- I will do a beach blackboard today.

You know, I don't have a blackboard anywhere near my house. But I do have a beach near my house. And I was out explaining this to somebody the other day. And I just took a stick, and I wrote it out on the beach. And I'm going to do this today. Because there is a way to fix this.

But you have to share the map. You have to show the math. Because the truth still matters. We have to defend the Constitution. The tenth amendment. State sovereignty. It's not a throwaway line. Texas has the right to draw the maps without DC micromanagement. Okay? They can draw the maps the way they want to draw the maps. The same thing with Illinois. They can draw the maps the way they want.

It's not fair. I don't like it. But it is the law!

Then we have to call for local reforms. We have to have independent redistricting commissions, that actually mean something.

Not performative democracy.

But actual checks and balances. I don't know if you can get there.

But the more local we make this, the better!

See, you know, gerrymandering makes us more extreme.

Because they'll run a line of constituents through a neighborhood. One side of the street, because this group on this side of the street, votes for Democrats. And on the other side of the street, it's Republicans. They literally will run that line, through to gather up all of the Democrats on the street, and forget the Republicans.

So that means that that Congress person no longer has to moderate at all.

They don't -- they don't -- the more extreme they become, the better off!

Because they're only talking to their side.

When you gerrymander, which we have forever. Our Founders warned against it.

Because you're creating these factions. You're creating distance between each other, and you have to equip your neighbors on this.

If they don't understand this, walk them through it. Print the maps. Compare the numbers. Build an informed electorate.

That's what -- that's our job. That's our job. Nobody will do this for us. Don't look to the Republicans to do it. They will spin it their own way.

And the other way, is refuse to retreat.

If 57 lawmakers can run away from their posts, make sure everybody knows, you're not going to run away from yours. We stay. We vote.

We hold the line.

You know, this -- this whole thing. Everything we do today, everything. Everything in the news you see, this isn't about Epstein.

This isn't about redistricting. This isn't about immigrants. This is about the restoration of trust! Trust! All of it. Can you trust the people who are redesigning the maps?

No.

Why?

Because it's in their best interest to gerrymander.

Well, I'm only doing it because they're doing it.

Okay. Then maybe you do that, bit let's work towards stopping this. Let's -- let's work towards a system where we don't gerrymander. Okay? But that's only going to be solved at the state level, where it belongs. You know, America can't survive a political class that lies with one face, and governs with another. But it can survive if her people, the remnant of those who really understand America and understand our history. If we rise with open eyes, with strong backs. And hearts grounded in principle, when we realize, we're not powerless. We're not pawns.

We're the ones with power.

That's when everything will change.

And I will tell you, I think I said this earlier today.

I'm not sure where the storm is.

I know the storm is on the beach.

I know it's on shore.

I just don't know what part of the storm is on shore. I don't know if we're hitting the worst part of it yet.

I don't think so.

But I know it's onshore now.

We have to batten down the hatches, and then start, you know, piling supplies up. And I'm not talking about boards to board up the windows.

I'm talking about building up our supplies to rebuild. Because this storm is going to pass us.

And I don't know what the devastation is going to be like on the other side.

But, you know, just like Mercury One does.

We -- we put supplies, just outside of the storm's pattern.

Because we know, we've got to get them as close as we can, to where the storm is supposed to hit.

Without it being hit itself, so once the storm passes, we can push in, and we can rebuild fast.

When this storm is over, we're going to have trouble, if we're standing here with no supplies, nothing prepared.

To rebuild quickly.

Because that's when people will realize, there's nobody coming.

There is nobody going to rebuild.

There's no help.

If we're not there to help, that's when things get really nuts!

So I -- I just -- I'm very excited for next year.

And you'll understand a little more, you know, in the coming days and weeks of -- of why I'm not talking about it yet.

But I can't wait to get started. Because I just know what we have to do.

And that is something that I don't feel like I understood for a very long time. You know. I knew I was supposed to warn. But I always felt there was something more to do.

I think my mission has changed. I've been given a new calling.

And it's to rebuild!

Rebuild and rebuild right now.