RADIO

How Trump Can FIGHT the Democrat Dark Money Resistance

Who’s funding all the massive protests against Elon Musk, DOGE, and President Trump? And, if they’re not grassroots, can Trump do anything to fight back? Glenn speaks with “Bannon’s War Room” co-host Natalie Winters, who makes the case that the same progressive dark money groups that keep popping up, including George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, are the brains behind the operation. She lays out a few ways that Trump and congressional Republicans can push back against these groups and their “color revolution paradigm.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Natalie winters, co-host of Ben's war room.

And also, White House correspondent. Welcome, Natalie. How are you?

NATALIE: Hi, good. Thank you so much for having me.

GLENN: Thank you for all of the hard work on so many stories. But this one in particular is really disturbing.

Because it shows that this is nothing, but the same revolutionaries, and this time, they are pushing into the zone of terrorism.

NATALIE: Kelly. And I think the most concerning thing here, is that sort of proves our worst caricature of the Democratic Party, which is that the last four years, they used tools like censorship, lawfare, overregulations. Political persecutions. To go after not their enemies. But people who disagree with them.

And now that they have effectively been shut out, right? Of their institutional and government levers of power.

They can't impeach President Trump. So what are they doing? I guess what Marxists always do, not just show in a preference for private property and try to destroy Tesla. But they're using violence and intimidation. And I think the way that the left has tried to depict these actions. As organic civil society.

Just, you know, speaking about democracy.

And democratic values.

There's nothing civil about this.

We have terrorism.

And, frankly, there is nothing societal.

These people are being funded by far left donors, like George Soros, like the Tides Foundation. The same state money, dark money interests that funded basically every violent protest, we've seen since Trump really entered the stage.

GLENN: Yeah. I mean, literally the oligarchs that they say, that Elon Musk is.

It's --

NATALIE: You're exactly right.

GLENN: So tell me about some of the people that are behind this.

NATALIE: Sure. So Indivisible is sort of the ring leader of all of this. And their biggest refrain that they are always pumping through the airwaves, is that they are a grassroots organization. That they are people-funded and people-powered.

But if you dig into their financials, which as you alluded to, they have essentially erased all of their web pages showing the personnel of their movement, but from the sort of 990 filings where you can see, again, by design.

Not exactly who is funding them.

But overwhelmingly the majority of the funds that support this group come from big dark money type foundations or philanthropic organizations.

The NGOs of the world. That's obviously a euphemism.

But of that, the majority of it, and I'm talking. Seven-plus million dollars, since 2018 alone. It's coming from George Soros' Open Society Foundations. And like I said, when they tell you that they're funded by people in this people power.
It's not true. And in some cases, most recently.
They were doing a whole thing.

I'm sure your audience has seen this apoplectic thing, that House Republicans are not showing up in town wall. Well, Indivisible was behind that.

And they were actually reimbursing their groups. In some cases, $200 to buy all the protests that they needed for that.

And they have a separate program, where they'll reimburse groups up to $1,500 for get out vote operations.

Advocacy and recruitment.

The idea that this is all organic.

And that Trump is just angering Americans so bad by going against waste, fraud, and abuse.

It's not true.

It's the same people who funded the protest outside the DNC. The flag burners.

And frankly, it's the same people who fund inside the DNC.

GLENN: How do we -- how do we reverse this?

Let me see if I can pull this up here. There's a new poll out that shows from Rasputin. Are the attacks on Tesla and Tesla vehicles, justified?

Nineteen percent of Americans said, yes!

Among the respondents, ages 18 to 34, that was 36 percent that said, they are justified!

Among respondents that are Democrats, 31 percent say they are justified.

When asked, is it fair to call the attacks on Tesla and Tesla vehicles a form of domestic terrorism? Overall, only 46 percent say yes, 39 percent say no, 15 percent said, I'm too dumb to have an opinion.

Among the respondents who say they're Republicans, 68 percent said yes. The respondents who say that they're Democrats, 58 percent say they're no.

How do you keep people saying, and a growing number of people saying, no. It's totally cool to shoot that guy in front of a hotel, because he works for an insurance company. And we have burned down the Tesla. And we can find people in our own neighborhood that have them, target them, and destroy their lives, until they take a stand with us. And say, they believe what we're doing. And they sold their Tesla.

How do you get so many Americans to get behind that?

NATALIE: I think there are two key things that the Trump administration could do to push back on that. First and foremost, I think would be provoking the tax-exempt statuses of a lot of these organizations that are organizing these protests because they're essentially all 5O1C3s, which is absolutely insane.

And I think it is continuing to press ahead on the Act Blue investigation.

And just in general, the dark money funding.

But also, a lot of the money for groups, for example, there's a new thing called the resistance lab, which is being spearheaded by Representative Pramila Jayapal in conjunction with Harvard -- in that, they're not a prestigious Kennedy school. And though they have similarly deleted the web pages, some of their top funders are, other than USAID. And the Department of State. And the lady who runs it. Who uses they/them pronouns, so make your own judgment there.

But she herself has been funded extensively by USAID. The United States Institute of Peace. And I think it's important to drill down on this figure. Because this is someone who is not studying protests and nonviolence. This is someone who, their CE reads like a rap sheet. They're studying terrorism and violence versus non-violent protests.

Not because violent protests are immoral or unethical. But because they think at this moment, non-violent protests are more effective in bringing out their sort of utopian Democratic world view, and I use democracy, not in its true sense.

But these people are extremely, extremely radical. And I think what it goes back to, is what we started this interview on.

They have always used this color revolution paradigm to institute change, and to oppose President Trump. It's why they take him as an autocratic, as an authoritarian.

Right? Because then they can justify their outside the system regime change tactics that they've used abroad. And since they usually rely on impeachment proceedings, or contested election results, they can't do that. Right? They didn't take the House. President Trump won the popular vote, overwhelmingly.

So they're relying on this narrative, that what he's doing is so unpopular. And they sort of AstroTurfed outrage and protest and intimidation tactics.

To really this one myth they can't be President Trump is a dictator that must be opposed at all costs.

GLENN: What is -- I mean, I agree with you that Trump needs to go after the 5O1C3s.

I mean, I'm a little disappointed in Pam Bondi.

However, I say that, realizing, she doesn't even have her full team around her.

It's taking so long.

But I'm hoping that the justice departments starts to move a little quicker on things. Because this is -- this is clearly terrorism.

It is clearly, these -- these organizations, that, as you've said, have been taking money from the taxpayer. To do all of these things.

And the only way to stop them, I think, is to not just call them out.

But if they're breaking any kind of law. Which they clearly are.

Go after them with everything we have.


NATALIE: Yeah. And I think these radical judges have been stepping in at every point. It's a continuation of the lawfare.

And I think the fundamental issue. Look, you had all these Republicans talking tough about how they're so difficult. Where were they on the USAID front? All this waste fraud that was uncovered for decades. They did absolutely nothing.

Now the best we can get, is not even a full committee hearing but a subcommittee hearing that's been postponed on judges with some experts to tell us and confirm what we know.

That these people are radical targets and activists.

It's so unfortunate. Because our side. Our grassroots are fueled by patriotism. Not dark money. Not George Soros money.

And they have such amazing investigative reporters. You go on X now.

People are the ones exposing these groups.

And elected Republicans that should be enforcing. We're not even telling them to go after the groups in an autocratic, no despotic way. We're just saying, enforce the laws, enforce the facts that we should not be receiving tax exempt statuses or 5O1C3 statuses. Or go after the election billionaires. I mean, the case that they've been unable to make against right-wing billionaires, who are trying to root out waste, fraud, and abuse.

We need to juxtapose them to actual, I will argue criminal cases that you could bring against a ton of Western billionaires who are clandestinely and covertly funding terror operations here in the United States. Not just since January 20th. But for years on end, the issue I think starts with the weak faculty at the Congressional Republicans, who just have continually showed that they are unwilling to do anything.

GLENN: When is Trump going after them?

I would love Trump to give a speech today on a few things. One, okay. I just did the tariffs. The tariffs are not going to work by themselves.

I need actual tax reforms. Tax cuts. And a tax cut is not renewing the Trump taxes that are going to be raised. That's not a tax cut. That is a tax cut eight years ago. Give us a significant tax cut Congress. And also, I'm taking a hatchet to the regulations beginning right now. And anybody who wants it to stand around with their hands in their pocket, that's fine. But we cannot stand around and wait.

The time is too short to stand around and wait.

I'm looking for him to start, really pushing, you know, eyes into people's heads just a little bit.

Saying, excuse me.

The pressure is on me.

The pressure is on the population of the United States.

Do your damn job, Congress. Right now.

NATALIE: Well, and it's quite interesting, right?

Because you hear President Trump get criticized for "flooding the zone." They say, it pejoratively. But flooding the zone is just a response to the absolute disarray and chaos that President Biden left this country in.

We have to flood the zone with executive orders and action after action and tariffs after tariffs because of what happened in Afghanistan, at the Southern border, cost this country with Chinese spy balloons.

Right? It's such a double standard. And Congressional Republicans, the same people who were joining the DOGE caucus, and posting all their pictures, and talking their tough game on Twitter. They're voting to continue spending levels. At the very same -- and the Senate is already moving to try to make so President Trump can unilaterally oppose tariffs.

You know, the Senate is the people who have been there probably than I've been alive, who allowed the Chinese Communist Party, who allowed these Third World countries to overtake our manufacturing jobs, to seize essentially our means of production.

And they did nothing about it. Because their donors, the people who have been funding them. Got rich off of it, and enjoy it. And their constituents, the people who knock on the doors for them, donated to them small-dollar amounts, they have nothing, but contempt for them.

And you can see it on display. And, frankly, it's insulting to the intelligence. Your audience, abandoned war room audience when they think that just some tweet, or some strongly-worded letter.

Or some, you know, halfhearted hearted hearing against the judge, who has no really enforcement power.

It will be enough to satisfy us.

The MAGA movement is about shifting the goalposts for accountability.

And I think our audience has been very clear, that it's found in prison sentences. And in investigations for people who have committed crimes. And not just strongly worded letters. Or, you know, Fox news segments where people are going off.

And did nice spicy rants. And these criminals keep getting away with it.

GLENN: Yep. Natalie, thank you so much. We'll talk to you again. Thank you for all the hard work you do. Sincerely, thank you.

NATALIE: Likewise, thank you.

GLENN: You bet. That's Natalie Winters, White House correspondent, and also co-host of Steve Bannon's War Room.

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.