Best of the Program | Guests: Sen. Mike Lee & Steve Deace | 2/15/23

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance.

Fiscally responsible, financial geniuses, monetary magicians.

These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to Progressive and save hundreds.

Visit progressive.com to see if you could save.

Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates.

Potential savings will vary, not available in all states or situations.

I mean, I think some people are always going to have a problem with us bringing on some candidate they don't like.

Oh, you'll have people that don't like that we brought on Donald Trump.

Yeah.

People that don't like that we brought on Ron DeSantis.

People that don't like that we would bring on now Nikki Haley, just announced her presidential bid and is on the campaign trail.

I mean, they're always going to get on.

But that's not our job.

Right.

And, you know, the most divisive time among conservatives is the primary.

Everybody gets mad at everybody because you feel like, okay, well, we kind of feel like we're all sort of on the general same side on a lot of this stuff.

Conservatives listening to conservative shows.

And then you bring, you're on one candidate and you love this one candidate, you hear another candidate and your host isn't bashing them, or you love that candidate and the host is critical, people get really sensitive on that stuff.

It's our job.

This is how I look at it.

Yeah.

Because this is different than 2016.

I had a definite opinion.

And it turns out, I think, in many ways, my opinion was inaccurate.

But I am,

I don't think it is our job to decide.

It's our job to decide as individuals for ourselves.

But I would like to set kind of this attitude that it is

friend to all, but not a softy.

If your ask is, the listener is asking a question

about that candidate, that's the question we should ask, both positive and negative, as long as it's fair.

Yeah.

And then let them decide.

I'm not even sure if we should comment after they're on.

Yeah, I mean, we can, there may be instances where that makes sense.

But like, I feel like our job is to try to help everyone hear from the candidates in a way that actually is important and makes a difference.

For example,

if one of these candidates goes on CNN, we know what they're going to get.

We're going to get accusations of how terrible they are and calling them racist.

And there's no value to that.

There's also, however, no value from some fawning host who just sits here and praises the candidates.

So I want to get someone who's, you know, I want to hear from a candidate.

Do you remember Tim Russert?

Oh, yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

That's who we need to be.

You didn't know if you liked him or didn't like him.

You know, the candidate, if he liked him or didn't like him.

Yeah.

He was just, he was fair and hit both sides equally hard.

Said the good things.

Yeah, asked the tough questions.

Ask the tough questions.

Because it's not even just the, it's not even just whether you think the questions are legitimate.

It's how are these candidates going to perform under the fire of difficult questioning?

They're going to get it during the campaign, so it's better that they get it from an audience that actually wants to hear their answer and not just call them racist.

And at the same time, if you can't perform to a conservative audience, you can't get your ideas across in an effective way, and you feel, I mean, how many candidates have we have on that just feel like they're just reading talking points and they're just terrible at this?

You better know that early.

You better know that before the votes are cast or you get into a general election and you wind up losing to a dolt like Joe Biden.

Yeah, there's going to be good candidates this time.

At the very beginning, there's going to be good candidates.

Sure.

Nikki Haley, like her, dislike her.

She was great as a U.N.

ambassador.

And good governor, too.

Yeah, good governor.

Ron DeSantis, good governor.

I think Donald Trump, for all of his faults, good president.

Kamala Harris.

What?

Anyway, here's the podcast brought to you by Relief Factor.

Boy, you got a pain in your ass, like Joe Biden does.

But he just doesn't even know anymore.

He's like, I've got this hemorrhoid.

Mr.

President, that's the vice president.

And it's just driving me up a wall.

Anyway, relief factor can't take care of all of your aches and pains, but

it's sure taking care of the severe pain that I had.

I want you to put your burden down and just try this.

I know you've tried everything.

And this, because, you know, some radio host is like, ah, you should try this.

It's not going to work for me.

I know, because that's that's what I thought.

But it did work for me.

And 70% of the people who try it go on to order more month after month.

It's relief factor.com.

Try the three-week quick start.

Not working for you in three weeks.

Stop taking it.

Relief Factor, 800, the number four relief.

800 for Relief.

ReliefFactor.com.

Feel the difference.

You're listening to

the best of the Blendbeck program.

We go to Senator Mike Lee.

Hello, Senator.

How are you, sir?

Doing great.

Thank you very much, Glenn.

I want to give you a couple of

headlines.

U.S.

intercepts four Russian warplanes yesterday near Alaska.

The next headline, U.S.

warns it will defend the Philippines after Chinese laser was shot at their Coast Guard.

Let's see here.

Norway

warns of growing importance of Russian nuclear deterrent.

China's President Z

conveyed his support yesterday for Iran during a visit from the first visit from the Iranian prime minister.

We are not in good shape.

Do you and members of the intelligence committee have any idea

what's going on?

Well, we know some things are going on.

We know certain things are happening, but there's a whole lot we don't know.

And in particular, there's a whole lot we don't know about the so-called objects brought down by fighter jets firing missiles over the weekend.

And that was the focus of yesterday's classified briefing.

Okay, so Mike,

we hear balloons.

We hear that they now, the Pentagon came out yesterday after your briefing and said, well, you know what?

It's nothing.

These are probably just commercial balloons.

But we have the Canadians sending out the hazmat teams to look for this.

And we hear this morning that they are UAPs, which I guess could be balloons, but usually those are, you know, something solid.

These were the size of cars.

And they weren't balloons.

They were metal.

Is that true?

Yeah.

So So first of all, we don't really know what they are.

I don't know how they claim now to know what their nature is, whether they're commercial, military, or from some other origin, because they haven't found them.

I suspect at this point that they're theorizing on what it might be.

That was what was so frustrating yesterday is they held this classified briefing.

to tell us about what happened.

And they showed up and basically said, we don't know what happened.

We had all hoped and expected, based on public statements, that they had covered what was left of these objects and that they were studying them.

They hadn't found them, at least as of yesterday when they briefed us.

They hadn't found them.

They still really know what they are.

So wait, did they show you video?

I don't know what you can and can't say.

No.

Come on.

We launched missiles.

We know we have the video from the cockpits.

We know that.

We repeatedly asked them about that.

Can you show us anything by way of photographic

documentation of it, video footage, anything like that?

They said, yeah, we've got some.

It really isn't useful because the objects are so small, so far away, that the resolution doesn't really do anything for us.

Then why would we shoot them down?

It's an excellent question.

So

we shot them down, not knowing what they were, just based on...

their altitude.

We just knew that they were there.

But

I still can't fathom why it made sense to scramble fighter jets, shoot missiles at them, bring them down when we have no idea what they are.

Okay.

So

they're apparently not that concerned about it or else they'd be frantic and they're not that.

We found out last night that the United States government had been tracking that Chinese balloon.

for over a week.

Once it was launched from China, we locked onto it and tracked it.

Did they tell you that yesterday?

There are things in there that I probably shouldn't repeat from what I know, but

it's safe to say that we did know before this thing hit the United States that it was in the air.

We were aware of it and we knew what was happening.

And so at that moment, they really should have brought the thing down.

And at whatever moment they they realized that it was coming onto the United States and that it had the ability to collect data, they should have brought it down.

We kept hearing last week about the fact that, well, you know, it wouldn't have been safe to bring it down over the United States.

Nonsense.

Bull crap.

Look, even at 60,000 feet, these things don't have a glide capacity.

They're balloons.

And so if you puncture the balloon, it's going to head straight down.

Now, yes, there's a debris field, but there is a lot of space between Alaska, off the coast of Alaska,

to be clear, and the rest of the United States, where there are miles and miles around, where there are no people.

And they should have brought it down.

Here's what I think, what?

What I suspect is that these were make-up calls.

They were compensating this last weekend for what they didn't do the previous week.

which was take bold aggressive action.

Only they took the bold aggressive action, it seems, on the wrong objects at the wrong time.

Are we going to know?

Do you think we're ever going to know this?

I certainly hope so.

It seems almost

unbelievable to me that we shot down three of these things over the weekend.

We didn't recover any of them.

And if there was no immediate threat, as there apparently was, the explanation we've heard is that it entered the space where aviation happens.

Yeah, okay, fine.

That's understandable.

Sometimes you need to bring things down, but there was no immediate threat.

If that being the case, why couldn't they use a different kind of aircraft?

Right.

One that could observe it up close

before shooting it down.

You can't really do that with a fighter jet traveling at the speed of sound.

You know, I got it.

I mean, it's like...

It is like our government is being run by, you know, Mrs.

Hoffelmeier's fourth grade class.

I mean,

and just the boys, because the girls would be a little smarter.

The boys, it's just like, let's blow it up out of the sky.

This is crazy talk.

There is another possibility here that they are using this, whatever it is, that they are using this to get people off of the Nord Stream pipeline story from Seymour Hirsch.

And I don't know how much you can talk about it or what,

what you

know,

but mike i find this extraordinarily concerning because there's only a few countries that could do it none of them really had the incentive or they would have let us know if it was another country would you have gotten a briefing on that do you think if they would have told us

it's it's hard to say i we We don't necessarily get those briefings just because they feel like it.

Usually it's because a member is asking or because there's been national news about something and they decide they need to brief all members.

I'll tell you, I haven't gotten a briefing on this.

I'm trying to get one.

All this, of course, goes back to this report published by journalist Seymour Hirsch last week

indicating that according to his story,

There were specialized U.S.

Navy teams that planted explosives there and that the United States was responsible.

I don't know whether this is true.

I'm trying to ascertain whether it's true.

But I will say this.

We need to approach a near-peer nuclear-armed geopolitical adversary with extreme caution.

And so I would like to think that if we were going to do something like this, there would be some sort of clear authorization from Congress.

You see, the chief executive, the president of the United States, commander-in-chief and all, doesn't have the ability to take us to war.

I don't think it's a stretch to say that doing this,

not just to Russia, a nuclear-armed near-peer geopolitical adversary,

it's also an attack on France and on Germany that affects a lot of Europe.

I would like to think they'd get congressional authorization of some sort before doing that.

Well, he said that there was a way around that because

obviously they should have done that if we were involved.

I just don't believe that

all of the allies, with all of our technology and everything else we can't figure out okay it looks like it's probably these people um i personally because they're so zipped up about it it's got to come from the west and the only ones that can do it really are france or us or great britain and those guys wouldn't do it um

uh but you know you look at you look at this mike and if Even if that's not true, can we find out if anything in that report is true as far as that there are these secret to seal teams that can be trained off the books so Congress doesn't know about it?

Yeah, look, I think

there are a lot of details,

at least enough details in the Seymour Hirsch piece that this should be fairly

amenable to being proven or disproven.

Because either certain things match up or they don't.

It may be easier to disprove than to prove, but I think that can get us a lot of the way there.

And yeah, there are others who could have done it.

I mean, in theory, it could have been China.

Perhaps China wanted to make sure that it had access to more of Russia's natural gas and that it could get it at a lower price.

In theory, it could have been China.

And there are a handful of others who it could have been.

But this is worrisome to me, Glenn, for the simple reason.

Look, I don't know Seymour Hirsch.

I'm not familiar with any of the facts alleged in his report.

But there are a couple things that worry me.

Number one, on February 9th, 2022, President Biden during a press conference said that if

Russia attacks Ukraine,

there will no longer be a Nordstrom 2.

The journalist who had asked him the question about what he meant was doing her job and followed up and said, what do you mean by that?

That pipeline's

not under our control.

And he reassured her, believe me, we have the means to do it, and

it'll be done.

It will not exist.

So when you couple that with the fact that in this country, we have for a long time seen overreaches by the executive to the point where a lot of people just accept now that in the name of a clandestine operation,

the United States can effectively wage war without an act of Congress authorizing it.

That really does concern me.

It's not that I am certain that we did this.

It is, I'm certainly not.

It's not that I can verify the Hirsch article is I can't.

But it's that it really troubles me that I can't immediately rule it out.

And you can't get a briefing on it.

All right.

Hang on just a second, Mike, because when we come back, I want to ask you, do we want to know?

Stu and I were talking about this this morning, and we were like,

you know, the blue pill might be the one to take on this because

uh this is aimpeachable maybe worse uh it is it's an act of war um

it's i don't know anybody that's gonna fight against russia

if they attack us because we we blew up the pipeline europe i mean the world will hate us

uh And it means war.

So I don't know.

Do we want to know?

And we'll come back with Mike Lee for that answer in a minute.

If pain is a part of your life, you may have gotten to the point where you really do believe that you have to take it lying down, sometimes literally.

I'm here to tell you I understand that because I was right at the point where I'm like, I'm just going to lay down.

Thank God I have a wife that is,

she is such a sweet woman.

She gets tired of listening to me gripe about things because

I gripe about a lot of stuff.

But if it wasn't for her, I might might never have tried Relief Factor and got my life back.

Listen, please, please, just try it.

If it doesn't work, yes, you're out $20.

But $20, what is that?

If you can get your life back, 70% of the people who try it find the relief and go on to order month after month.

So please, just try it.

I didn't believe it would work for me either.

ReliefFactor.com.

ReliefFactor.com or call 800 for Relief.

800, the number 4, relief, 1995, relief factor.com.

Feel the difference.

10 seconds, station ID.

All right.

Mike Lee, do we want to know?

Look,

I think the American people do deserve to be in charge of their government.

I agree with that.

It is very much a mixed bag because as you alluded to before the break,

the answer to this question, if it turns out that the United States was responsible, has very dire consequences.

And

I'm not even talking yet about what happens within our government, what the consequences there might be.

But I think that

does this rise to more than an impeachable offense?

Quite possibly, yes.

I believe it does.

Because if you go to such great lengths to engage in an attack, a provocative offensive attack on a near-peer nuclear-armed geopolitical adversary, and you do so

in a manner that violates our Constitution, because that's, as I see it anyway, it seems to me like an act of war.

Last I checked.

War can't be just declared, just decided by a president.

And sure, I know clandestine operations happen.

Discrete military strikes are something different

than something provocative on this scale that inevitably lead to, and in fact, are war.

So if we would find out that this is even a real possibility.

What happens?

What do we do?

How do we tell our allies?

How do we tell Russia?

So we can kind of, before we say it, say, I'm going to tell you something, but you got to promise not to be mad.

I mean, we've got to, you know, in that case, we have to promise that you're not going to launch a nuclear strike.

How do we tell them this?

I don't know.

I don't know.

That's part of what makes this such a difficult thing.

But the one thing I do know is that ignorance is never something that's going to put us in a position of strength.

No.

And I do think it's important that we get answers on this.

I would like to know.

And whether we end up finding out or not, whether this thing is buried so far,

so deep by the military intelligence industrial complex in Washington that we can't get to it, whether we find out or not, whether we did it or not.

I think it's very important for us to have this national conversation.

It is.

Because for decades, we've seen this this gradual

accretion of power within the executive branch when it comes to the war powers and increasingly Glenn the way wars are fought these days

you don't typically have soldiers lined up on a battlefield in in corresponding parallel columns no you you've got you've got stuff like this this is war in the 21st century And so we need to have a national conversation about the fact that today, as at the time of the founding,

we need our Congress, the people's representatives, to make the decision about going to war.

And clandestine operations need to be reined in to something truly discreet.

This one wasn't.

Mike Lee, thank you so much for everything you're doing.

And we pray for you and we'll keep you in our prayers for your safety as you continue to go down this road.

Thank you.

Hey, thanks, Glenn.

Take away.

Bye-bye.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Peter Zine,

the author of The End of the World is Just the Beginning.

Hello, Peter.

How are you?

You know, I don't think I've ever been introduced as Mr.

Rainbows in Sunshine.

Well, you've never been on this show where

we don't tend to have an optimistic look at what's coming our way.

But I was listening to you, I think it was on the Rogan show, and I was listening to you, and

you actually made me feel better.

And

I'd just like you to tell us your view of what's coming,

the end of globalization, but also the

end of China, because you say that's imminent.

Well, that's a whole batch of things to bush together into a small chunk, but let me do my best.

There's two things things that have dominated and created our world.

Step one is in 1945, the Americans found themselves facing down Stalin in Europe.

We're like, oh, we do not want to tangle with this guy alone.

We need allies to stand between us and the Soviet forces.

But World War II had been the most destructive conflict in human history, and the only allies were countries that had barely survived it.

So we needed to provide something to induce them to not cut a separate deal with the the Soviets.

And we came up with globalization.

Before globalization, everyone was kind of left to their own in terms of development.

And if you had iron, ore, and coal and food

and oil, you could industrialize.

But if you didn't have all those things, you were probably a colony.

Well, with globalization, you now only needed one.

and you could trade for the others.

And so we all started to develop and industrialize and urbanize together.

After 75 years, that has brought us the global system we now know with global finance and global energy and global supply chains and global infrastructure and global agriculture.

And so we have a population of 9 billion people, 8 billion people, excuse me, living more wealthy than any other period in human history.

Right.

With small countries and big countries all in the mail you together.

But as we've made that transition, we've changed the way we live.

Pre-industrialization, we all lived on subsistence farms.

But as these new industrial jobs became available, we took them and they were all in the cities.

Well, in the countryside, kids are free labor.

You have as many as you can and then maybe one more because that's how you know you've had too many.

You move into town, you live in a condo, and kids are just sources of migraines.

So you have one or two, maybe, maybe, maybe three.

You play that forward for 75 years.

And it's not that we're running out of children globally.

That happened 30 years ago.

It's that we're now running out of working-aged adults.

Also, the Americans created globalization as a security ploy.

Cold War ended 30 years ago.

We're out of that business.

So, the security underpinnings that allowed trade to happen are mostly gone.

And the consumption that is done by young people is almost gone.

And this was always going to be the decade that both of these trends broke at the same time.

Now, China specifically is the perfect manifestation of what what sort of glory

demographic change and globalized security can bring to a country.

Because for the first time in their history, they weren't preyed upon by the outsiders.

They were able to consolidate internally, and they were able to use their large population to create an economies of scale to take advantage of the global environment.

That had never happened to them before.

You fast forward that to today, however, and the Americans have lost interest in maintaining the trade, we're turning a little bit more nationalist on the Chinese specifically, and their demographic transition was the fastest in human history.

And according to the newest data we have, not only did they overcount their population by about 100 million people, they now have more people in their 60s, than their 50s, than their 40s, than in their 30s, in their 20s.

And so we are looking at abject demographic collapse in the Chinese space this decade.

And that assumes that none of the Chinese dependencies on the American Navy to import and export become a problem.

So we're really looking at a simultaneous crisis here in China that is demographic, that is political, that is cultural, that is agricultural, that is in trade, that is in finance, all at the same time.

And there is no way they walk away from this.

So you believe that, I mean, what is all the positioning now with the, you know, the balloons and the tough talk?

What's happening there with President Z?

Because on the surface, he looks rock solid in control.

I think you would say to the average person,

who is the next leader of the world?

And they'd all say China.

But you're saying the opposite.

Yeah, it's not going to be.

Yeah, absolutely.

I mean, we're going to think of China 20 years from now, kind of like we think of.

the Soviet Union today.

You know, it had a good run and then it just imploded.

Let's see, what's the best way to put this?

Chairman Xi,

ruling China is a difficult task.

There's a lot of different geographies.

It doesn't hold together well.

Yes, China, using air quotes here on China, has existed in some form for 3,000 years, but it's only been unified in roughly the shape we recognize today for a total of 300 of those years.

Half of that's under the Mongol occupation.

And the remainder, or most of that, is under the American-led globalized system, where we basically said colonization is no longer kosher.

Excuse me.

Anyway, the only way that you can kind of rule the space is to purge the system of competiting political and economic influences.

And Xi started that process 10 years ago and more or less completed the purge of the political system five years ago.

But then he spent the last five years purging the bureaucracy of any potential power centers that could challenge him.

And in doing so, he's gotten rid of everyone in the country that is competent.

So now it is just him.

And in many ways, he's kind of become what Donald Trump always wanted to be.

He's got the adoration from people below the zealot, and he's got the voices in his head, and that's how he rules.

And there's absolutely nothing in between.

And that means we're seeing policy collapses across the entire system.

And the balloon situation is a good example.

So under COVID, the Chinese were carrying out this very hateful foreign policy that they kind of called Wolf Warrior, which is basically China is right, you're wrong, you're stupid, you're going to die, and China's going to take over everything.

So when you hear people saying that they think China is going to dominate, that's Wolf Warrior diplomacy kind of working behind the scenes.

There's not a lot behind it, but

it riles people up.

Well...

It led to some of the greatest foreign policy disasters in China's history.

So the Biden administration has killed the Chinese semiconductor sector.

They are dependent upon the Russians for energy, but the Russian energy cannot be produced over the long term by the Russians.

So they know there's an energy crisis in their future.

They're experiencing an outbreak of something called African swine fever, which is endangering their food supplies.

Their financial system is basically a really, really badly run Enron or subprime at scale.

And so they see all of these pressures, and Xi knows that the jig is almost up.

And so starting about two to three months ago, he started forcing the bureaucracy because he has to have one-on-one conversations anymore.

He can't just say stuff and make it happen because all the competent people are gone.

He started tilting things towards a more productive or at least less hostile direction.

And as a result, Secretary Blinken was about to go to China.

Well,

when you don't have a functional bureaucracy, when you don't have functional communication within your own government, all it takes is one dude who thinks he's doing the great leader's will to throw things off.

And we now know from our communications with the Chinese that Xi didn't know about the balloon.

And the foreign ministry didn't know about the balloon.

And it looks like hardly anyone in the military knew about the balloon.

That means it was just some dumbass in the intelligence services who thought that this is what was necessary and so slapped it together and sent it off.

And it led to a complete diplomatic meltdown with the United States.

Even if you're of the belief that Biden is ultimately looking for a way to

live with the Chinese, events like this at a minimum are going to push back the date where we can even think about that for three to six months.

And to be perfectly blunt, China doesn't have a lot of time.

All right, which leads me to

another question.

And let me get to that in 60 seconds.

Hang on.

Dolores wrote in about her experience with Relief Factor.

I started taking Relief Factor not long ago and so far it has completely stopped the arthritis pain in my hands.

They were so bad it was getting impossible to do any of my sewing or anything.

Not anymore.

Thank you Relief Factor.

Dolores, thanks for writing in and giving Relief Factor a try.

If you or somebody you love is dealing with actual pain, please try Relief Factor.

It's not a drug.

It was developed by doctors, so it not being a drug, it's not going to whack you out.

It has four natural key ingredients that work with your body to fight inflammation, which causes most of our pain and most of our problems.

So please give it a shot.

Just try it for three weeks.

That's all they ask.

Try it for three weeks.

If you don't see any results after taking it as directed, in three weeks, you're probably not going to.

But 70% of the people who try the three-week Quick Start go on to order more month after month.

Dial 1-800-4 RELIFE.

800, the number 4 relief.

Or go to relieffactor.com.

That's relief factor.com.

Feel the difference.

10 seconds, station ID.

Okay, so you say

that China doesn't have an awful lot of time.

Doesn't have, you know, six months to wait.

If your theory is correct, what stops them from being even more dangerous right now?

Well, one of the things to keep in mind, well, I think it's great to compare what's going on in the Russian space to what's going on in the Chinese space.

So from the Russian point of view, their population is dying out as well for a mix of reasons, some of which overlap.

And they feel that if they don't militarily act to get what they see as a more defensible perimeter now, that they will not have the military capacity to try it five, ten years down the line.

And they're

So there is a scenario where if Russia wins this war and a couple wars beyond it, they actually are in a better position strategically.

China doesn't have anything like that.

There is no country or series of countries within reach that they could conquer.

There is no war they could launch that would help.

This is a country that, unlike Russia, is based on the import of raw materials and the export of finished goods.

This is a country that imports almost all of the technology it needs and many of the intermediate parts.

It's best to think of China not as a manufacturing center, but as an assembly center.

And I don't say that to denigrate them.

It's just it's a different sort of economic model and that means you have to have different support structures internationally in order to make it work.

And for China it's all about the movement and it's movement they can't control.

The U.S.

Navy may only have half as many ships as the Chinese, but our fleet is fully blue water.

Only 10% of the Chinese fleet in combat operations could sail more than 400 miles from the coast.

That's not enough to support a global mercantile empire.

We do that for them as part of globalization.

So even if they were to capture Taiwan without firing a shot, it really wouldn't solve anything because they import 75% of their energy and 80% of the materials that allow them to grow their own food.

So in any war scenario, you put a couple of destroyers in the Indian Ocean basin, doesn't matter who you are and you've destroyed the Chinese system it'll die within six to twelve months and you'll trigger a famine that will ultimately kill hundreds of millions of people that would be the end and the Chinese know that

now

there that doesn't mean it's risk-free that doesn't mean I'm belittling what you're suggesting here there is a chance that it could happen even though I don't think it's a very high one

if the Chinese admit to themselves that they're facing demographic, economic, agriculture, and trade crisis all at once that will tear their system down.

And I think they do realize that.

Then there's something to be said for picking the time and the place of a war, even if you know you're going to lose, because it lets you write the narrative, even if it's one of national failure.

And if you're facing a deindustrialization collapse, that might, might allow the CCP to persist as a political ruler of the system into whatever's next.

And so if you can guarantee your personal power for the low, low cost of 300 to 500 million dead Chinese from famine, that might

be worth the cost.

So

no mistake.

This is not a war of expansion.

So

I kind of feel like what everything you're saying about, you know, China could be said about us as well.

I feel, you know, you talk about the deglobalization, but that is the opposite of where, you know, Build Back Better and all of that stuff is going.

There are these globalists that are still trying to cobble into even a bigger system, you know, of the West against the East

that I don't, I mean, they're not going down to the little local communities and saying, hey, let's all make sure that we're solid as local communities.

I'm really not worried about the United States.

So number one, we have the best demography in the advanced world and a better demography than most of the developing world.

At current rates of aging, we will be younger on average than the Mexicans, the Indians, the Indonesians, and the Brazilians at some point in the early 2050s.

We became younger on average than the Chinese over a decade ago.

In addition, the United States created global trade.

And one of the conditions in order to induce countries to join our security network was that we wouldn't take advantage of that.

So as a percent of GDP, we are the least involved with the major economies in the world, and most of our economic integration is with Mexico and Canada.

That's like almost half of our total.

So if you factor that out, as a percent of GDP, our total exposure to the entire world is less than 10% of GDP.

And a big chunk of that has to do with the shale revolution and energy exports.

Take that out, you slim it down even more.

Our weakness in, also we're the world's largest producer of oil and the world's largest producer and exporter of foodstuffs.

Our biggest weakness is in electronics manufacture.

And if China were to disappear tomorrow, yeah, that's going to be a pain in the ass.

We're going to have to rebuild that from scratch.

We're going to have to double the size of the industrial plant over the course of the next five years.

And if you think we have an inflation problem now, just wait till we lose access to Chinese goods and we have to build out our own system.

But

That will generate the fastest economic growth in the history of our country.

And when when it is done, we will have more reliable partners closer to home with shorter supply chains that use less energy and use workers that are local and sell to consumers that are local.

This is a good story.

Okay.

So all we have to do is build up ourselves to make it happen.

All right.

I've only got

a couple of minutes left, and I just want to make sure that I push back a bit.

There are several critics of yours that say, you know, you've been saying this since 2005, that they were going to collapse, et cetera, et cetera.

How would you answer that?

The hardest part of geopolitics, especially demography, is timing.

One of the problems with geography,

one of the problems with demography is this has never happened before.

We've never had global aging.

What I've described for China is an extreme case, but it's happening everywhere.

So N equals zero historically for points of comparison.

The reason why this is the decade that I think it's really going to go down is this is the decade where not just China, but a lot of other countries literally age into mass retirement.

And this is

no longer enough people under 30 to even theoretically repopulate.

This is pretty much what happened to Japan, right?

I mean, in the 80s, everybody thought Japan was going to take over the world.

And then all of a sudden, just Japan just fell off the map.

Absolutely.

Part of that was a debt issue, which the Chinese have is actually a bigger debt issue.

Part of it is demographic.

But the two big differences between the Japanese and the Chinese.

Japan saw this coming 30 years ago and took steps to boost their birth rate and relocate industrial plant to better locations like the United States.

They're as prepared as they can be.

China's done none of that.

Peter, thank you so much for being on with us.

It's Peter Zine.

His book is The End of the World is Just the Beginning.

This is the best of the Glenbeck program.

We welcome to the program.

Co-author Steve Dace, co-author of the book, The Rise of the Fourth Reich.

Now, I'm going to get the whole name right.

The Rise of the Fourth Reich, Confronting COVID Fascism with a New Nuremberg trial, so this never happens again.

And in the press release, it does say, and I love this.

I love, Steve, I love this.

It says the title of the book, and it says, this book does not pull any punches.

So you're not,

really?

The title says nuremberg trials but you're you're not going to hold back you're not holding back i find that surprising uh so uh so steve

you uh you and uh daniel horowitz did an awful lot of work uh on this and laid out the case um in a mock nuremberg kind of trial can you first just tell people

what the nuremberg laws are?

Sure.

There was really two sets of Nuremberg trials after World War II, Glenn.

And the more famous one, of course, is

dealing with Nazi officials on the political and military end and their atrocities.

But there were a separate set of trials that were held for what was categorized as kind of the biomedical fascist state.

That essentially the entire healthcare sector was given over to the state as a means of procuring experiments and carrying them out on the people.

And out of those trials came what's known as the Nuremberg Code.

And it's not really lengthy.

It's a pretty short read.

You know, Google it any time that you want.

And what you'll hear to find, you'll read it in about 10 or 15 minutes, what you'll find is that basically every consonant, vowel, and syllable of the Nuremberg Code, which was designed to prevent something like what happened in Germany in the 30s and 40s from ever happening again, it stood up for about 75 years.

And then every syllable, consonant, and vowel of that code, Glenn, was thrown out the window and trashed from March 16th of 2020 when the lockdowns began and really even up until now.

You know, we have incredible data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics about a gigantic rise in disability claims beginning in 2021, starting in the fourth quarter.

You see that this status pretty stable going back to 2008 and then all of a sudden in the fourth quarter it goes off the chain.

Gee, what happened at the fourth quarter of 2021?

I mean, it couldn't possibly be a jab mandate to force you to take a jab in order to work.

And then a bunch of disabilities kicked in after that couldn't possibly be that we have so much incredible data there was a Michigan state study that came out that found just through 2021 it estimated well over 200,000 COVID deaths in the country from the jab COVID deaths in America from the JAB if you prorate that worldwide it's something like seven and a half million deaths worldwide and so whether it is the jabs whether it's the virus themselves with the gain of function research many of the the same elements that pushed this toxic jab on people are the same ones that were involved in committing or creating this chimeric concoction in Wuhan.

And so they're kind of guilty and culpable on both ends of this spectrum.

And then the lockdowns and the masks and everything else, we get into all of this in the book.

And I think where this book really, you know, with me and Daniel, you're going to get a lot of data.

You're going to get a lot of policy specifics.

But where this book, I think, goes next level, Glenn, is the meat of it in the middle.

The personal testimonies, whistleblowers from the Department of Defense, from the healthcare sector, victims, people whose children

were

maimed, injured by the jab, and can't get any relief.

People whose loved ones died in the hospital because they wouldn't give them effective treatments.

They were essentially medically kidnapped.

Those testimonies in the middle.

If you think this title is too provocative, and believe me, we did not utilize it lightly, okay?

But if you think...

The Nuremberg trials.

You didn't take Nuremberg trials lightly?

Huh?

Okay.

No.

Of course not.

You know me, master of subtlety, right?

If you read

and listen to these people and their suffering and the suffering that they witnessed inflicted on others, you read these testimonies, you will see that we not only didn't oversell what has happened here, if anything, we've undersold it.

Okay, so

help me out because Nuremberg trial, the Nuremberg

rules are very, very clear, as you said.

And Washington Post has come out and said, this is not a violation of the Nuremberg Code because these studies were done before they were released on the public.

How do you answer that?

You lost me at Washington Post.

Yeah, I know, I know, I know.

I know.

But one of the, really at the heart of the Nuremberg Code is the idea of informed consent, the idea of transparency, the idea that you don't force people into a medical experiment.

We did that.

I'll give you, I'll prove it to you right here.

On August 6th of 2021, now admittedly, Glenn, this occurred on CNN, which means a lot of people didn't see it.

Okay?

So this is going to be news to people.

All right.

Not unless we're seeing it now.

On August 6th of 2021, Rochelle Walinski went on with Wolf Blitz and admitted.

that with the advent of the Delta variant, the vaccines no longer styney the transmission of the vaccine

of the virus.

They're no longer a traditional inoculation definition of a vaccine.

She went on to say that even the vaccinated now could get COVID and then spread the virus.

She said this on August 6th.

So right away, whatever medical, before we get to the constitutional question, whatever medical necessity emergency that would have you contemplate the ethics of imposing this experimental substance on billions of people across the globe is already out the window.

It won't even stop the spread of what we claim to be afraid of.

She admitted this.

Almost one month later to the very day she admitted that is when Joe Biden issued his anti-constitutional, detestable executive order on COVID man, on the COVID jab, which he said for the entire year he had no power to do.

And then out of nowhere, almost exactly one month later, after his CDC admitted the jab doesn't work, that's when he actually said, you can't go to work unless you take the jab.

That is a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code and proves once again which isn't hard to do that the Washington Post doesn't know what the sand hills are talking about or they're just lying so tell me do you do you draw any conclusions on what the motivation would be

I think there's lots of motivations and I think when you get into and we ask this question in this book a lot what's the benign innocent explanation for these things we ask this question a lot we ask questions like how come they never turn back because some people are going to say hey this thing is an emergency It got thrust on us.

We got blindsided by it.

Fine.

How come they never voluntarily said, ooh, we went too far with that?

How come they're still in court trying to fight to put masks on people on planes?

Okay.

They never voluntarily pulled back.

Every time they pulled back, Gwen, it's because the people either resisted to the point it wasn't enforceable or the courts made them do it.

They never said, oh, you know what, guys, we got that one wrong.

We had to sue to get Pfizer's documentation.

They wanted those hidden for about 75 years.

They never showed any empathy, any transparency, or any humility at all unless it was forced on them, which shows you there aren't any benign and innocent explanations.

And the best we could come up with, and it won't necessarily give you the warm fuzzy, is that this is just good old-fashioned greed, mind-numbing greed.

If that's the best we're hoping for, then all the other ones are a little bit further down the rabbit hole, my friend.

So do you have, we're talking to Steve Dace.

He's Blaze TV show host of the Steve Dace Show, follows this program every day on Blaze TV.

He's also the co-writer, the co-author of The Rise of the Fourth Reich.

Steve,

when you're

looking at all of this evidence, is there any

real, tangible hope that anybody's going to be held responsible?

I think

the biggest difficulty with this is really not in the political system.

It's with the people.

And, you know, we did the JAB special.

I hosted it with Jason Whitlock here earlier this month here on Blaze TV.

And Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who has just been Joan of Arc level of hero on this.

And I asked him, you know, what's the critical mass?

And he said, well, you had a first Nuremberg because Ike threw open the camps and forced the world to see what went on there.

And he brought it to a critical mass.

And Ron said, you know, when you have less than 15% of American adults, didn't take any of this gene juice.

A lot of people are like, man, I don't want to believe I am a ticking time off.

I don't want to believe I'm the next collapse suddenly.

I don't want to believe I'm the next died suddenly.

I mean, we have one of our colleagues here at Blaze TV on his show saying he thinks he's vaccine injured.

Okay, I don't want to be the next one who finds out a year later, six months later, that it's me.

And so let me just move on.

Let's pretend like this never happened and get on with real life.

I think that, Glenn, there's so many people that were betrayed into buying into this.

that I think it's the masses of the people that really don't want to come to grips yet with the full scope of what happened here.

Well, the book book went on sale yesterday.

Grab your copy now.

This is one of those things that I would also urge you to get a paper copy of.

Things can be deleted online, but I would have a paper copy of this.

Order it wherever you get your books.

The Rise of the Fourth Reich by Steve Dace and

also

Daniel Horowitz.