The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guests: Rep. Chris Stewart & Carol Roth | 3/28/22

Episode Date: March 28, 2022

Glenn starts off the show by discussing President Biden’s latest overseas trip and analyzes what his true intentions are. Author and former investment banker Carol Roth joins Glenn to discuss Biden���s newest wealth tax, including unrealized gains. Utah Rep. Chris Stewart joins to discuss his legislation that would prevent intelligence agencies from spying on American citizens. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Look, Air Canada F.A. Canada does a sold world. Super, an offer for the assort. Station

Thermal, Volcan. Parlant of Volcan. You've seen the price for Japan? M. Pairn and Sushi.

Wow, the sold are good for Mayork also. We could go to the plage and make a

land of the sea-sill. Mmm, I'd adore the canolil The Canolie. Attain, there's another

R-Divit this sold is Densura Limited. Reserved to R-Canada com or to your

agent of voyage. The conditions can't Hey, hey, oh my goodness, what a great episode on this episode. Stu discovers that he has a nephew, and he adopts his six-year-old nephew and the laughs ensue. And then we go on a trip to Disneyland. Oh, man, it's a very special podcast.

Today, actually, we start with President Biden. And do we agree? Do we see it the same way? Or you're kind of, you're a little host. I don't know if I'm going as far as you are as far as what they're attempting to do. I know if it's a shock. But I think I'm with you. The most innocuous description of these moments in this speech, I can't buy.

Yeah. I can't buy that. Yeah. So there's an interesting paradigm that is being set up that we are at war and brace yourself for a very long. war and I explain it right off the top. Then we also have Carol Roth with us to talk to us a little bit about what is happening with our economy and that new special tax, that 20% tax of unrealized money. Oh. That's great. I can't wait. Yeah. When you really understand what that is, it's not just a tax. It is anti-American and would just destroy what's left of any economy or free market. Also unconstitutional. If you wanted to add that, I don't know if I didn't care us about that anymore. What?

Yeah. All on today's podcast. Okay. So let's start with this wonderful, wonderful speech that the president gave yesterday. First of all, or a day before, he was in Poland and it was remarkable. You could compare it to, and it has been Pope John Paul. and his speeches to Poland and and JFK and Ronald Reagan and I think it's true

I mean he really he really went right where everybody who is involved in this right where they live cut five please as a matter of economic security and national security for the survivability of the planet we all need to move as quickly as possible

we'll clean renewable energy. And we'll work together to help get that done. That's great. That's great. Oh, yeah, that's right. He also was talking about Ukraine and NATO and what was happening with Ukraine. And I think what's great is what he ended it with. Now, listen how awkward this is.

Usually you leave on a happy note. President Biden decided not to. Here it is. Ukraine will never be a victim. for Russia, for free people refused to live in a world of hopelessness and darkness. We will have a different future, a brighter future, rooted in democracy and principles, hope and light, of decency and dignity and freedom and possibilities. For God's sake, this man cannot remain power.

Okay, all right. So that was weird. Apparently not in the speech. I don't know if you can trust that or not, but let me refresh your memory on the Gorbachev Reagan speech while he was in Berlin Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall that went back and forth with the State Department

he said I'm saying it no you're not yes I am no I'm not wait a minute it's like that Bugs Bunny routine he it was taken out of the speech three times it was not in the teleprompter and he knew right where he wanted to say it and he wrote it it was him Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall

Now, that was not a Mr. Gorbachev, somebody needs to overthrow you. Quite different. But the State Department was against that because it would cause all kinds of problems they thought. And it did, it did, unfortunately for the Soviet Union, not for the rest of the free world. It freed the world. Now, Putin, I mean, this was, it seems like an ad lib because you wouldn't have put that at the end of the speech. but Mr. Mental Agility couldn't find a place to put that into the speech. So just at the end, he's like the whole time.

Now think about this. If it was an ad lib, the whole time he's thinking, this guy can't be in power. This guy can't be in power. And he can't find a place to put it in the speech. So he just adds it to the end. Now, is it possible that that's what he really thinks? Well, let's remember Joe Biden is known for leading his staff. He's known for whatever the policy is they're working on.

Do you remember the homosexual marriage thing? We know that the White House was working on a draft to announce, you know, they were for gay marriage, yada, yada. And Joe Biden just came out on some weekend and went, I'm always for gay marriage. That's where we need to be. and the White House was a little pissed, remember that? Oh, yeah.

Okay, so he's done that kind of thing several times where he leads the staff. He leads, he just blurts it out. Oh, I mean, this conflict was began around that whole situation where he said a minor incursion might not be that big of a deal. Right. This is the same type of moment. Right. So if he's thinking this and this is an. ad lib, what does that mean? Now, let me give you some, let me give you some additional stuff.

There's a possibility he's just completely senile. And that's a discussion we should have, because if he's that out of control, he should not be the president of the United States. I honestly don't think that's it. I think he has a different point of view. And let me make, Let me make the case here. First of all, this strengthens Putin. Horrible, horrible idea. Horrible idea. But also in his framing, he is also framing this as democracy versus autocracy.

This is a theme of his first year, his nightmare year. This is one of the first things that stood out to me in his first speech. from the well of the Senate when he told all of the people sitting there in the capital that you were the people that made the world a better place, that they were the people that got us through this pandemic, not the American people, the people in power. And then he twice, maybe three times, questioned democracy versus autocracy. So he's going for a bigger thing.

He's not going for the Putin getting out of Ukraine. He's going for something much, much bigger. Case in point. Did you see the weird tweet that came out from his office? He's not on Twitter. I don't even think he knows how to work the phone. He's like, the phone doesn't have that little grinder there on the side where my gathel, give me, give me eight, one thousand.

and what? So I don't think he knows how to work any kind of, any kind of phone sitting on the pot, you know, tweeting. Listen to this. We are engaged in a new great battle for freedom. A battle between democracy and autocracy, between liberty and repression. This battle will not be won in days or months either.

We need to steal ourselves. for the long fight ahead. Wow. Wow. What? Hmm. What does he see coming? Now,

Blinkin came out this weekend and said, that's not what he means. I suggest it is. Because what was the other problem, what was the other thing that he said this weekend? while he was over there. He made several things that they had to walk back,

but they were all in exactly the same direction. Let's play Cut 13. Now, with the Ukrainian people, Ukrainian people have a lot of backbone. They have a lot of guts, and I'm sure you're observing it.

And I don't mean just a military, which is we've been trained in since back when they, Russia moved into the southeast northeast Ukraine but also the average citizen

looking how they're stepping up good how they're stepping up and you're going to see when you're there some of you've been there you're going to see you're going to see women young people stand in the middle of the front of a damn tank just saying I'm not leaving

I'm holding my ground they're incredible All right, okay. They take a lot of inspiration from us. And you know, a woman who just died, the Secretary of State used to have an expression. She said, we are the essential nation. It sounds like a bit of hyperbole,

but the truth of the matter is, you are the organizing principle around which the rest of the world is, the free world is moving. Okay, stop. There's a couple of, there's three things here. First of all, let me take down the obvious

kind of essential one going to his mind state. That woman, that just died. That would be Madeline Albright. But he couldn't recall her name that woman who just died. Okay. So that makes a case. He doesn't know what the hell he's even talking about.

Which is a conversation we should have. But let's look at this as maybe he does know what he's talking about. He just has no filter on it. When he suggested that the troops that were stationed in Poland that they would witness the bravery of the American people when you're there. He immediately followed it with and a lot of you have already been there. But that doesn't make sense. Now, I dismiss this as an old man gaff when I first heard this,

but this was one of the first big gaffs they had to walk back. So I dismissed this as just, ah, well, it's just an old man gaff. Well, doesn't that fit with, he has to be removed. And doesn't the, the world looks to you, the soldier, you are the organizing principle that the world is being built around? Those fit. So I'd like to give the president the benefit of the doubt. But if I'm on the opposing side, if I'm advising Putin,

because this is what they have to do, what is this president even saying? Is he incompetent or is he revealing what their real intention is? I would say, if I were advising Russia, I don't know, Mr. President, but I think that there is a pattern here. Just look at what his Twitter feed said. Again, it doesn't mean that he's not senile. But my case to you is he's revealing the things that are coming. And how do we know?

Well, those were all crazy off-the-cuff clips, but they're all consistent for a bigger, longer war. All right, maybe he's just thinking that himself, but nobody else is. Then why would the White House tweet, we are engaged in a new great battle for freedom, a battle between democracy and autocracy, between liberty and repression. This battle will not be won in days or months either. We need to steal ourselves for the long fight ahead.

That's coming approved from the White House yesterday. America, we better decide a couple of things. First of all, is our president competent? if he's making these kinds of mistakes, and they truly are mistakes because he just is not a gaff machine, this is a very dangerous situation. If he's not competent, he should not be the president of the United States. And I know what that means. That means a world run by Kamala Harris.

God help us all. but at least she would not make any sense and wouldn't be doing this stuff or are we being prepped for a war. It seems to me when Putin is talking about his first phase is done and everybody's looking for negotiations and Putin seems to be looking for a way out of this. this is exactly the wrong kind of language to use. Where is the White House saying it looks like Putin may be done with the first phase, as they said, and it looks good.

Maybe we have a bright future with a very quick war that has come to an end. Where's that encouragement? Instead, we need to steal ourselves for the long fight ahead. I think this administration wants war. I think they want a fight. They just don't want to release it yet. But that's what they're talking about in the White House. And he's just blowing the cover.

That's my theory. But it's either that or the guy is totally incompetent and saying things that are very dangerous, that are not connected to any reality in the White House, and that should stop. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program, and we really want to thank you for listening. I am surrounded by a new family of people who have their life back

because of relief factor. I'm one of them. I was in pain and got to the point to where I just couldn't do it anymore. Anybody else feel like, you know, I just can't get up another. day. We have our life back because of relief factor. It's not a television commercial. It's a group of real people with real results that had real pain. Try it yourself. Relief factor. This guy when he started, completely bald. Look at him now. Doesn't do anything for your hair.

But it will help you. Get out of pain. Give it a shot. Try the three-week quick start. It doesn't work, move on. But we're here to tell you it works. Relieffactor.com. Carol Roth, I got a lot to talk to you today, but I want to start with this 20% minimum income tax on people that make over $100 million a year. Hi, Carol. Hi, Glenn. You know, it's not even an income tax.

It's a quote unquote wealth tax, which is an idea that is so bad that nine countries in Europe, abandoned it. I mean, imagine an economic policy being so bad that Europe's like, yeah, you know what? We're out. So didn't France try this recently? And it, like all of their wealthy people moved away. Yeah, the statistics were that between 2000 and 2012, 42,000 millionaires and had a mass exodus from France. So it basically drove all the people out.

Because, you know, if you have those means, capital is mobile and you're not going to stick around when you have other options. And that was the catalyst for them being another one of the countries that go, you know what, maybe this isn't such a great idea. And even though there is a long tail on it, they're still collecting a little bit of revenue because it was grandfathered in. I think around 2014, they said, we're gone. Now, talk to me about, so nobody has tried to move that number down. I'm concerned always when they say it's only going to hit these people. simple. Taxes never do that in America. No, I mean, anything that is targeted at the billionaires is really a ruse for them to get you to

agree to it because, oh, why would I care for it to affect the billionaires? But really, it's going to impact you. And that is the ruse. If you think about this being tied to individual income, usually if you are an upper-tier individual. You have very sophisticated tax work. You probably have trusts. You may have shell corporations. So I would imagine there's probably going to be some loopholes and go, well, it's not really an individual income. It's a family trust or, you know, some way around it. But now you've agreed to it. And they're going to go, well, you know, we put it in on this, but we're going to move it down. We're going to move it down. You have to remember, the Biden administration wants to hire 87,000 new

IRS agents. I mean, that's not for going after the billionaires. That's for coming after you. So they not only want to do that, they got the funding to do that in this last bill. So the really dangerous thing that is in this wealth tax is a tax on unrealized gains. This is insanity. Absolute insanity. Can you explain it? Yeah. So unrealized gains, I was. say it's not really a thing. We shouldn't normalize it. It's really a ruse to have unlawful seizure of personal property. So let's say you buy a house and you bought it for $100,000. And then in your neighborhood, another house sells for $200,000. They're going to say, well, you know, all the houses in the neighborhood are, you know, they're worth about the same. So you have an

unrealized gain of $100,000. We're going to tax you on that. So what do you do? You have to sell your house to pay the taxes. So take that analogy then and move it to the stock market. Most of these individuals who are wealthy are still on papers because they own big pieces of companies, which the market has valued at higher and higher levels. And so on paper, their ownership looks big. But if all of a sudden they have to now sell stakes in their companies, that upends the entire market system. It basically nationalizes or socializes companies. It affects all of us through pensions and 401K because of supply and demand in the market. If you have these big people who are selling massive shares of their company, it's going to drive the prices down for everybody.

It's an utter total disaster. It's unconstitutional. And it's one of those things we have to push back on because, like you said, if you just say, well, it's just for the Elon Musk's and Jeff Bezos of the world. you're accepting a breach in principle and then the game is over. And it won't be. I mean, this is the way, you know, the Great Reset says by 2030. Now, think of this.

You have to get people out of ownership in, what are it, eight years. Eight years, two elections, you have to get people to own nothing. This is a way to do it. if you have unrealized taxes and on unrealized income, meaning your house, think about how much your house is worth today if you wanted to sell it, knowing that tomorrow it could go down and, you know, you lose money if you didn't sell it. You just don't know where the top and the bottom is of a market. But if you have to sell your house to be able to pay the taxes for income that you didn't

have. It was all on paper. You don't own houses. You put a lot of people out of their house. Yeah, and it's all based on theory. Unfortunately, we already have something that's kind of close to that in property taxes. This would just double and triple up on it. But, you know, it's anything you own. I mean, maybe your grandparent gave you an heirloom a painting that's now worth a bunch of money. Like, what are you supposed to do? Oh, it's worth a million dollars. Now I have to sell this family heirloom so I can pay taxes for what? I mean, this is the most un-American concept that you could possibly. This is what caused Robin Hood.

I mean, this is the kind of thing that was going on in the adventures of Robin Hood. That's what the sheriff was doing. They were doing unreasonable taxes and then giving it to the state, giving it to the king. And all of the people that were in with the king. I mean, we are starting to live in Nottingham. Yeah, and the crazy thing that when anyone talks about it, an unrealized gain or this theoretical gain and value, they never talk about the unrealized losses. What about, you know, if something's gone down, are you going to give it back to me? Of course that.

It never looks like that. Nobody ever wants to socialize the losses. They only want to participate in the gains. It's one way straight. And again, they use, this is what happened, by the way, in Venezuela. They use this, you know, kind of populist language and say, oh, you. you know, these elites, they own everything, let us take it over, let us take over business, and you're all going to share in it.

And obviously, they went from the fifth biggest economy in the world decades ago to the state that we all know that they're in today. This is the way in, and it is so dangerous. I cannot even make it emphatic enough. It is, it's truly amazing that the president is suggesting this and putting this in. And this is something that the Democrats would have been, again, you know, 10 years ago. It shows how far left this president and this administration really has gone.

And the Democrats have gone. Absolutely. And even somebody like Janet Yellen, who's been an absolute disaster at the Fed and now at the Treasury, you know, when this idea first circled around, she was going out and saying how great it was and trying to populate it and it got a lot of pushback and it kind of died for a little while. And now, you know, holes are down. So here it is again. Maybe we can distract everybody from, you know, all the other economic disasters and inflation

and high gas prices by saying that we're going to go after the greedy billionaires. And, you know, hopefully, again, we will get that same kind of pushback and say this is unreasonable. It's unconstitutional. And it just cannot happen. All right. So let me switch topics. You wrote a great article. I think this came out last week.

ESG advocates are killing the American dream. Can you just go in the middle of it, you talk about a 60 minute piece where they're talking about or talking to the CEO of TriCon Residential. And this is happening everywhere and nobody's really paying attention to it. And it is so dangerous. This is so infuriating because these global elites who are pushing ESG are saying, well, we're doing this for the good of society. society and that S, that social piece, you know, we want to make things, you know, good for everybody. So these same banks and financial institutions who have bought into this idea that they're going to make decisions that are good for society are now funding companies that are competing

with you to buy houses. We are underfund or excuse me, we are underbuilt in this country by about four to five million houses depending on who you ask. And so there's already a supply demand and balance. But now you've got these big financial institutions that are backing these folks, you know, like the ones that are quoted in the 60 minute piece and interviewed there, as well as others that are publicly traded that are going in and buying 30,000, 40,000, 80,000, I saw one of them, residential homes. And they're going in with all cash offers. They're often waiving inspections. Sometimes they're not even looking at the houses. And so from a buyer's perspective, you know, here's we know what's going to close. It's all cash. We don't have to go through any brain damage.

And they're just selling their houses to these corporations who are then renting it back to people who now can no longer afford a house have been priced out of the house. And this goes back to that whole great reset playbook of you will own nothing and it will be happy. Except we know you won't be happy because owning a home is part of that wealth creation and part of that American dream. So Carol, when do people do you think? What is the tripwire that wakes? people up, the average person, because the average person still, I think, is saying, this kind of stuff won't happen. You know, it's, it's Germany in the 1930s. Okay, yes, but it's not going to get any worse than this.

And if you keep moving the line to, it can't get worse than this, look how far we have come in 10 years. When, where is the pain point for the American people? That's an excellent question. I know you spent a lot of time of social media. Glad you ever seen the distracted boyfriend meme where you have the guy who's looking at a girl and his girlfriend's kind of like looking at what's going on. And it's, you know, very much everybody's looking at stuff that isn't important. Yes.

And the stuff that's really important is looking at you going, why aren't you paying attention to me? And there's just so much nonsense out there that people are highly focused on that I think you do such an incredible service to the average American. by bringing up these issues that nobody's talking about. You know, usually when the tripwire happens is after it's too late, you know, after it's affected so many people that you hit that tipping point that you're at the point of no return. And they go, oh, gosh, I guess we should have paid attention to this earlier. And, you know, that is the unfortunate thing. And it's why it's so important to have these conversations and for individuals to help spread the word.

I mean, this has to be a movement. you have to be out talking to your friends and to your family and to your neighbors about these things because it's really getting out of control. Did you see, is this true that the Fed came out and said the next four increases on interest rates will be 50 basis points each, a rise of 2 percent? I certainly saw that they were entertaining it as a possibility. I don't think that it was 100% set in stone, but they are more open to that,

which basically says, uh-oh, we are really behind the curve and we need to play catch up. And as we've talked about, has implications. Yeah, because that is how much, how much is the increase for each point

just for our federal budget? So basically it is tied into pushes up the 10-year yield. the 10-year yield already trading up. It was at like 2.5% for at least a day last week. And that affects when the government issues, bonds, how much it has to give in terms of interest. So when they do that, when they do that financing, and so this isn't on the current financing,

which is already done, but on future financing, every 1% is $300 billion in additional taxes. So it's not something that's going to happen immediately, but again, if you go back to that CBO projection that this was going to happen, you know, by 2032, it was going to be another 300 billion. They were expecting the 10-year yield to be at 2.1 percent by 2025 and we're already at 2.5 percent. It's unbelievable. It would mean another $600 billion that our government would have to pay just in interest. Crippling. The best of the Glenn Beck program.

We're with us now. he is the representative from the state of Utah welcome to the program Mr. Chris Stewart. How are you? Glenn, great to be with you as always. I sense a little sarcasm. So I want you know, I'm going to keep my sarcasm in check as best as you can during our time to get it this morning. I don't know what you're talking about. Chris is the author of The Final Fight for Freedom.

If you haven't read that book yet, you should. It is the perfect book for people that you're trying to explain. what is happening and what is coming because it takes you from a fictional scenario that everybody can understand and then he breaks it down and says yeah this is what's really happening uh it's a fantastic book the final fight for freedom so chris a couple of things first let's start with the president this weekend uh everybody's talking about what he said that you know basically somebody should go over and shoot putin maybe we'll do it it. I mean, that's one way to interpret it. And people are trying to make it look like he's just

incompetent. I have another theory. This is what he really feels. He's, he also, you could blow it off. And I did at first blow off his statement to the troops. And you'll see that soon when you get to, when you get to Ukraine. And they blew that off as just a, you know, a gaff. But then the White House yesterday also came out with a tweet that I found really quite frightening, and that is, we're engaged anew in a great battle for freedom, a battle between democracy and autocracy, between liberty and repression. This battle will not be won in days or months. We need to steal ourselves for the long fight ahead.

What the hell's going on, Chris? Yeah, boy, there's a lot to unpack there, Glenn. you know, to his statement, there's no question that that's the way he feels. I'm talking about Biden saying that, you know, we've got to get rid of Vladimir Putin. There's no question in my mind, and I think he's made that clear through the last several months, that that's exactly what he would like to see happen. And I think we need to ask ourselves a couple questions then. First, do you think of Vladimir Putin is stronger now at home than he was three days ago?

A lot stronger. I promise you that he is. There's no doubt about it. And by the way, the irony of us claiming, and, you know, this five years we went through where, you know, Russia was interfering with our own elections, with our own democratic process, how do you think the people in Russia feel now? I mean, and so they're going to rally around him. It makes him stronger. And the second thing is, do you think this makes it more or less likely that we'll be able to exit Ukraine without this getting worse? Because it certainly makes it less likely that that's the outcome when Vladimir Putin feels like he's fighting literally for his life.

So, Chris, I heard this morning that Vladimir Putin is saying phase one is over. And it looked like a chance for him to, you know, save face and kind of retreat and just take the Dunbar region, if that would be acceptable to the Ukrainians, which I doubt. But it looked like he was for the first time not talking about advancing. So are we closer to peace or closer to war after this weekend? Well, I mean, who knows, Glenn? I mean, honestly, I could give you my opinion on that and I will, but we have to caveat it with the sense that the fog of war is thick. And it's like the great saying,

everyone's got a plan until you get punched in the face. And that's what we're dealing with here. But whether it's less likely or more likely is unknown. I think it's certainly less likely that we have an exit, provide blood or put some kind of off ramp now than it was three days ago. But that has to be our goal. We have to try to set up some framework where he can claim some kind of victory. And whether they give up the domestic region in the east and probably Crimean, as you said,

Zelensky has been as indicated he'd be open to that. But the alternative is just a catastrophe. And that is we kill, who knows how many Ukrainian people in a proxy war for year after year after year now. it will look like Syria, seven, eight, ten years from now. If you engage in a proxy war between Vladimir Putin and the United States, and Ukrainians are in the middle of that. And by the way, if you think that Vladimir Putin has to go, well, what about President Xi? What about the Mollahs in Iran?

What about, you know, North Korea? Where do we draw the line on? Well, that's, that's, and compel. That's why it was scary to me that we are saying outright, this is not a gaffe. this is from you know the white house and potus's uh twitter uh feed a battle between democracy and autocracy between liberty and repression this battle will not be one in days or months either we need to steal ourselves for the long fight ahead when you're making it the battle not for ukraine but half the world and the world is already dividing itself now because of ukraine uh what are we really

doing? What are we fighting? Are we preparing to separate ourselves from half the world? Yeah, Glenn, and then I think of the top of your program, I was listening to you, and I think you laid that out really well and very thoughtfully. And once again, if you make this a battle between freedom and autocracy, or freedom and tyranny, then why only the Ukraine? Why only Russia? Once again, why not President Xi? If you want to, if you want to see autocracy, if you want to see repression, go to the western regions in China, as I've been able to do, and look at millions of Muslim Uighurs who are in essentially concentration camps. And by the way, building goods that our businesses here are more than happy to purchase.

And where do you draw the line, including, by the way, Glenn, with some of our allies. Because some of our allies are not pillars of virtue. We align ourselves because we must, in order to enable some type of global security, there are occasions, well, we have to align ourselves with people that are not democratic governments. And where do you draw the line? And if he's stealing us for this thing in Ukraine, then I wonder, well, what else is there? And how do you justify only the Ukraine and only Vladimir Putin? It's nonsense. And how do you... And we surely have learned this over the last 20 years. We cannot compel democracy on nations that it is not in their, in there, within their history. It's not within the people's actual genuine sincere interest in the sense that they are more than in many cases.

They're okay with the government and the leadership they have. Let me switch topics here because I don't know how he defines freedom and repression either because we have had a growing surveillance state in this country for quite some time. And it is terrifying. There is no such thing as just metadata anymore. Everything can be tracked down to the individual person. And you have just introduced legislation that is set up to prevent any intelligence agency from spying on American citizens. Don't we already have that law somewhere in the Bill of Rights? Yeah, yeah, we do.

And in fact, we have it very explicitly in executive. orders and in registration that's already exist. But here's the deal, Glenn, and I'm going to try to not be sarcastic about this, but I have to make this one point, is the U.S. people do not trust government agencies anymore. Pick one. Who knew that the CDC

was political? Well, we learned four or five years ago, the FBI and the DOJ certainly are, and the NSA and the CIA, you cannot... The post office is spying on us. Yeah. Yeah. So this is,

and this is, thank you for bringing this up, because this is so important. This administration came to power, and they said the greatest threat facing our security is not, once again, China or Russia or the Mullahs in Iran and North Korea. They said the greatest threat facing our own security is internal. They said it's white supremacy, domestic violent extremists, DBEs, they call it. Okay, so, well, then they use that justification, which is nonsense, as I think the vast majority of Americans would agree.

But then they say, okay, well, the intelligence community, for example, the NSA, the CIA, They cannot collect intelligence, but now, suddenly, under this administration, they can receive intelligence. Well, tell me the difference. What is the difference between collecting intelligence and receiving intelligence? And they then have used that new justification, that new jurisdiction, you know, description of a word, which I think we would all understand, say, okay, well, now we are going to involve the National Counterterrorism Training Center. and the Director of National Intelligence to write reports on domestic extremists, which are, by definition, American citizens.

It cannot happen. Well, we are, I mean, we've found a very convenient way we spy on England and they spy on us. And I don't even think we need that anymore. I mean, the problem is, is the intelligence agencies include almost every agency now. it's not that hard to do apparently and we're working together all around the world and somebody told me Chris I said when will a president shut this down and and they said they never never because the excuse will be everybody else has it and we can't be the only one that doesn't know what our citizens are doing yeah so well go ahead I think it's very

to point this out. You know, this type of attitude towards American people, the incredible abuse of the Department of Justice and FBI that we saw in the Russian hoax, where they're literally lying to Congress, again in the end of their line to the PISA courts, etc. That only

happened under a Democratic administration. And this new redefinition of words to where they cannot collect that they can receive. Once again, only a Democrat administration is allowing that. So I don't think we've got, I don't think we've equal concerns here. It's certainly true, the Republican Party, ironically, because this is

bit of a shift. Most of us were viewed as being defense hawks. But now we are the protectors of privacy. It's the ACLU and our Democratic colleagues and others such as them who are saying, you know, they're the ones who are fighting our initiatives, our efforts to try to retain privacy and protect civil liberties for Americans. So what would be the punishment for, let's say, Google just happens to say, you know what, we have all this data on people and we just got to get it off our servers. Do you want to take a look at it? What would be the penalty for any government agency? Yeah.

So, I mean, look, if they are, if the problem has been, is like I said, when we first started the interview, there's already rules. There's already executive orders. There's already legislation. But they don't attribute any penalties. to it. It's like, hey, this is a bad idea. But if you do it, we're just going to remind you, it's a bad idea. And then we're going to move on. Right. And so, you know, but there's no penalties attached. So there's no disincentive for it. And so this legislation would attach a penalty for it. It would attach a penalty to the person, to the individual. So let's just say you were involved

in any of these, you know, the Russiagate scandals, what kind of penalty would you receive? Well, and honestly, Glenn, they're kind of apples and oranges because the Russiagate scandal was just so clear. I mean, there was clear deception. There was clear lying to agencies. There was clear deception to the FISA courts. So it actually already is against law, as you can imagine, and there are penalties attached to those kinds of behavior. This is a little bit different in the sense of they are actually working under what they believe is a new executive authority. And so it clarifies that you don't have that authority. And if you continue to claim that authority, we're going to punish you. We're going to prosecute you for doing that. You can't do it and just say,

well, we believe we have the authority to do it. No, we're going to say very definitively, you do not. So we're back with Congressman Chris Stewart. And his book is the final fight for freedom, which is a must read. It just encapsulates almost all of the stuff that we are fighting against right now, and that is a wide array. And it's all explained in a very simple, simple way. And it's a little breathtaking. But it is also written in a way to where it takes you on a story and then shows you the facts of that story

and tells you exactly what's happening in our government. It's called the Final Fight for Freedom, and you can pick it up at bookstores now. It really is a must read. Chris, I want to talk to you a little bit about the maximum mother load of personal information, the programmable digital currency that we're now, quote, studying in Washington. Who is the one that actually authorizes the currency? Is it Congress? Or is it the Fed or who is it that says you can switch to a digital currency? Yeah, that's actually a great question, Glenn.

And I'm not an expert on this. I'll tell you my view, but it's subject to this one caveat, and that is, regardless of who's authorized, it may not be the actual individual or agencies who end up authorizing a digital currency. But I think that Congress ultimately has oversight on this. Clearly we do, and clearly we authorize this. Now, the Fed, as you know, certainly more than, more than I do, but as you indicate over and over again, the Fed has taken powers into itself, just like the president has over Congress. The Fed has taken powers into itself that are just frightening over the last 80 years and accelerating rapidly.

I mean, at breathtaking pace over the last five to eight years, going back probably to 2008. And, you know, it's an irony that the one thing people wanted from cryptocurrency was privacy. They wanted to, you know, to have an ability to not be manipulated by Fed policy or by monetary policy. And the creation of a government currency does exactly the opposite. I mean, it beholdens us in ways to where virtually everything we do, including everywhere we go, every purchase we make would be monitored, potentially monitored, and if so, you know, if deemed necessary, corrected by federal policy, by federal bureaucratic. it frightened the life out of people.

Okay. Well, Chris, would you look into that for me and see if there's anybody on the hill that is at least even questioning the Fed? Because I think this is going to come fast and furious. Oh, Glenn, there are. I promise you. I sat down for probably a little more than an hour with

Patrick McHenry, who will be the next chairman of financial services, just last week on this issue. And I promise you, he's intensely aware of it. He's intensely concerned as as we are. He sitting on that committee and being the chairman, we pray in 2022 when we take over the house, he will play a key role in trying to, trying to restrict what I think is just a horrible, horrible idea of this administration once again.

Wow. I am glad to hear that, Chris. Thank you very much. All right. The name of the book is the final fight for freedom. If you want to get into the fight, he's just introduced a new bill to prevent intelligence agencies from spying on American citizens. You can find all of his information at steward.house.gov. Get involved. There are no bystanders.