Keith Ellison and Gavin Newsom face scrutiny over alleged federal targeting in Minnesota, while the host argues the Epstein files exonerate Donald Trump by highlighting his 2006 condemnation of Jeffrey Epstein. The discussion critiques California's punitive "jock tax" driving capital flight and Valero's refinery closure, which threatens an energy crisis amid EV transitions. With 35,000 reported deaths in Iran complicating negotiations, the segment contrasts this gloom with optimism from a Gallup poll showing 50% expect market gains under President Trump's Main Street plan, suggesting progressive policies risk broader economic collapse across major US cities. [Automatically generated summary]
And then we come back to the same kind of philosophical question later on in the podcast.
Is Gavin Newsom a moron?
We answer that as well.
You don't want to miss that.
You just don't want to miss this show.
Also, Iran, what's next?
And how do you negotiate with a regime that's just killed 35,000 of its own citizens?
What are we looking for in Iran?
All of this and more on today's podcast.
American Financing is our sponsor.
That doesn't need to be dramatic to be dangerous.
It can be normal.
It can be a stack of little payments that often look manageable one at a time until you all start adding them up and you're like, wait a minute.
I'm working half the month just to stay even.
The interest is quiet, but it's constant and it turns into a treadmill for your income.
Lots of effort, very little forward motion.
When it's like that, the problem isn't that you're bad with money.
The problem is that the system you built that you keep paying into, you're going to pay into forever.
American Financing helps you step off of that treadmill, get out of that loop and look at the big picture and help you find a smarter way to structure everything so you're not getting bled out with high interest payments month after month after month.
This is about getting your finances to make sense again.
So I want you to call AmericanFinancing.net.
See if they can help you save an awful lot of money every month.
We push back against the lies, the censorship, the nonsense of the mainstream media that they're trying to feed you.
We work tirelessly to bring you the unfiltered truth because you deserve it.
But to keep this fight going, we need you.
Right now, would you take a moment and rate and review the Glenn Beck podcast?
Give us five stars and lead a comment because every single review helps us break through big tech's algorithm to reach more Americans who need to hear the truth.
This isn't a podcast.
This is a movement and you're part of it, a big part of it.
So if you believe in what we're doing, you want more people to wake up, help us push this podcast to the top.
Rate, review, share.
Together, we'll make a difference.
And thanks for standing with us.
Now let's get to work.
You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program.
So there's a new Gallup.
And Gallup is not usually very friendly to the right.
But here's what it says.
New Gallup poll, 50% of respondents say the stock market is set to go up a lot or go up a little within the next half year.
25% said the stock market is set to go down a little or go down a lot.
17% said the market will remain the same.
8% say they were unsure or refused to answer.
I love refused to.
I'm not answering that question.
But anyway, I'm not sure the stock market means as much as everybody else except your 401k.
You know, it's funny, when the stock market goes up, nobody says anything like, oh my gosh, have you seen my retirement?
My retirement, I can actually retire.
I've got, when it goes down, everybody's complaining.
Stock market's gone down.
What's happening to my retirement?
I think we should spend some time noticing as the stock market goes up because I think that's the only way that really affects you is your retirement.
Because the stock market is no longer attached to what I believe.
I don't believe it's attached to reality at all.
You know, there's nobody that says, you know, they've had some bad earnings.
And so that, of course, is going to have their stocks crater.
Occasionally that happens, but it used to always happen.
Now things just go up and you're not sure.
The poll also found 49% said the economic growth is set to go up a lot or go up a little within the next six months.
That's almost 50%.
49% say economy going up a little or a lot within the next six months.
36% said the economic growth is set to go down a little or go down a lot.
13% say economic growth is going to remain the same.
And 2% said, I am not answering that question.
How dare you ask me that question?
This is good news.
At least politically, it's good news.
If this is the way people are feeling and it continues to go this way, that's good.
Of course, it's also good news for the economy if it actually happens.
But there is reason to be optimistic.
I'm optimistic for the first time in ever.
I'm optimistic about things because I believe for the very first time we have a president that has a plan and is executing on that plan.
And it is a big plan.
It's not a eat around the edges.
It's the whole pie.
And now he's turned his focus inward and he's looking at Main Street, which he had to take care of Wall Street and the big banks and the WEF and NATO and everything else before he could turn in to Main Street.
Why We're Optimistic at Last00:14:05
But now he's turning into Main Street.
And I think you're going to see some good things.
Also, are you reading, let me bring Jason in on this.
Are you reading people saying, you know, Epstein files?
Boy, Donald Trump sure looks bad in the Epstein files.
Are you hearing that, Jason?
I got one comment from Zachary.
Zachary said that he's hearing that, and he was just curious what that was and what it all means.
And I haven't really seen anything but really exoneration for the president, really.
Right.
I mean, it is amazing that the Democrats even say the word Epstein anymore.
Because I'm convinced the only reason why they brought him up is because they needed to smear Donald Trump, needed to make him look like a pedophile or whatever.
But all of these documents, they show that, nope, he was the exact opposite.
The latest, President Trump, in a call two decades ago to the Florida police chief, bashed his former friend, Jeffrey Epstein, and called Epstein's procurer, Maxwell, evil.
This is now he is a retired cop, but at the time he wasn't.
And the FBI interviewed him, and he said, Trump called me because he was the police chief of Palm Beach, and he said, thank goodness you're stopping Epstein.
Everyone knows he's doing this and nobody would stop it.
The document came to light hours after Maxwell's lawyer turned on Trump or called on Trump to grant her executive clemency so she could speak honestly about what she knows.
Maxwell earlier Monday refused to testify to a House committee.
So she's trying to hold out so she can get a wave sentence or anything else.
And Trump has not been willing to do that.
And I think that speaks volumes, especially when you know he said two decades ago, this woman is evil.
In fact, Trump told him, the police chief, people in New York knew Epstein was disgusting.
Trump said Maxwell is Epstein's operative.
She's evil and you should focus on her.
During the 2006 call, Trump told Ryder that he was around Epstein once when teenagers were present, and Trump got the hell out of there.
This is the police chief, and he said, soon as we started investigating, he said, we called all kinds of people and said, hey, can you talk to us about Epstein?
He said, the only one that returned the call was Donald Trump.
And he returned the call.
He's like, yeah, what do you need to know?
Yep, bad guy, bad guy, bad guy.
I mean, how do you turn this into he's the bad guy here?
I mean, he is again, he's the most investigated man.
I want you to hear this.
He is the most investigated man of all of human history.
There has never been a bigger, more thorough examination of a man's life.
And I think including Hitler, because they didn't have the ability to do what they're doing now.
They've examined his life every possible way.
They have gone through all of his records, all of his IRA, everything.
And you got nothing.
You got nothing.
I think this is, I think the world owes him a giant apology, quite frankly.
You may not like him, but you got to say, every agency, every spy agency on the planet was looking for things on him to either make sure that he didn't win, so he wasn't going to do what he's currently doing to NATO, or Russia and China making sure that we continued to be weak.
You don't think everyone investigated him?
Of course they did.
Like nobody else has.
It's the one time, you know, because he always says, like, nobody's ever seen before.
It's crazy.
It's never been done.
On this one, he's right.
Never been done.
Never.
Nobody's ever seen anything like it.
It's true.
So, you know, give it up on the Epstein-Trump thing, you know, especially when Maxwell, he's not.
Do you know, Maxwell is so dirty, she'd be willing, I guess, she'd be willing to say, who do you want me to throw under the bus?
Do you need, who do you need me to throw under the bus?
And, you know, everybody on the left thinks that that's the kind of guy Trump is.
Isn't it interesting that he's not granting any clemency to her?
She's asking for personal meetings and he won't accept it.
She's begging him, Look, I'll give you the testimony.
I'll give you the, I'll tell you everything I need.
Nope.
He doesn't trust her.
Go ahead, media.
It's so funny.
Everything you do makes him stronger.
I've never seen anything like I've never seen a I've never seen Sun Tzu's, you know, what is it, warrior philosophy.
I've never seen it used like this before, where he's just using their momentum.
He just uses that and it works for him.
He knocks him out every time.
I mean, it's, it's, he's just so stupid.
I just don't know why you're doing it.
On tomorrow's program, we have the royal crown prince of Iran who is going to be joining me.
I am quite anxious to talk to him.
His father was the king of Iran when, you know, the Ayatollah came to town like Santa Claus.
And Is he the guy to run the country?
I really want to know.
And I mean this sincerely.
I don't know how we could negotiate with them.
You know, they just killed 35,000 people.
That's what we think we know.
You can't verify those numbers, but that's the number that's going around that pretty much everybody agrees on is they scooped up 36,000 people off the street and just killed them.
Holy cow.
How do you negotiate with them?
What do you want?
You want a nuclear treaty with those guys?
Why?
So let me go back to Trump.
I don't pretend to read minds, but I do read patterns.
And Trump has a very clear pattern.
Historically, it's been this.
Maximum pressure.
Move that Overton window as far as you possibly can.
Visible leverage.
And then a very narrow off-ramp.
Okay.
He doesn't negotiate from empathy.
He negotiates from cost.
This is what it's going to cost you.
And we've seen it with sanctions, with isolation.
You know, when he believed deterrence had failed with force, not war, but unmistakable signals that there was a line and he wouldn't cross it.
He drew that line.
That's why you have the biggest force since the Persian Gulf sitting all around Iran right now.
So what is he doing?
First thing he's doing is he's restoring deterrence by making Iran understand that escalation has real consequences.
And it's not because he wants war.
The guy hates war, but he wants to prevent it.
Second, keep the negotiations transactional, not moral.
He's going in, and I don't know if I like this, but he's going in and he's talking about nuclear capability, regional behavior, regime survival.
Those are the currency that this government responds to.
And then third, and this one really matters, don't own the uprising or the fall.
Okay.
Once the uprising or whatever is going to happen is American directed, whoever you replace is tainted and it's bad.
It's bad.
History tells us when repression becomes brutal and then America comes in, it becomes even more brutal.
So let me address the one thing that I think you might feel and I feel, and it's valid.
I don't want war.
I do not want our boys fighting another war in the Middle East.
Period.
Full stop.
But I also don't want to encourage people to protest and then watch them be rounded up and killed.
I don't know what to do.
You know, and that's the trap.
Revolt happened.
And we said, don't cross this line.
Don't kill your people.
And they did.
If you say nothing, are we then, do we have any credibility?
Has he lost all the credibility?
Is he complicit?
Are we complicit in silence?
Because I don't want to do any of it.
I don't want to do any of it.
So the only ethical path, I think the only one, the narrow one that he always is, is tell the truth.
Not with certainty where certainty doesn't exist, but apply pressure that targets the perpetrators, not the civilians.
Keep the information flowing, even when the regime is trying to bury it.
Maintain deterrence without rushing towards war.
So he's going to give them, I think he's going to do what he did in Venezuela.
You have a very narrow path.
I suggest you walk this path.
And if you don't, it's over for you.
The regime, though, has a huge weapon, and it's not an army.
It kills in the dark.
And then we all sit here and argue about the numbers.
Is 35,000?
Did they really kill 35,000?
Well, some people say it's 25,000.
Some people say it's 55,000.
We're arguing about numbers.
The point is, they've killed thousands of people.
That's really a big deal.
This isn't about protests.
It's not about nuclear weapons.
This is about death.
It's whether the modern world will accept uncertainty as a substitute for accountability.
Who did you kill?
Who killed them?
Stop it.
Because if a government anywhere can massacre its own people and shut off the lights and scatter all the evidence and survive on the argument that nobody can prove it, every single tyrant on earth learns that lesson.
This is what happened in Turkey with the Christians.
Hitler went in, Turkey went in and killed a bunch of Armenians.
And it was the Armenian massacre and killed them all.
And the world did nothing.
Forget about Turkey.
Hitler said, he saw that and saw the world's reaction.
He said, oh my gosh, you can kill anybody.
You can kill any number.
And the world's not going to respond.
We're teaching people lessons.
I pray that Oman, we're in Oman now.
I don't even know.
Wasn't she?
I thought that was a model.
But they're negotiating in Oman today.
I don't know what they're negotiating for.
Again, again, I don't want war, but I also don't want this.
I don't trust them.
What do you negotiate for?
But I guess we're going for nuclear weapons or something.
I don't know.
We have the guy who is the special envoy for nuclear non-proliferation.
He was the guy who went into Libya and said, you got to get rid of all your WMDs and convinced Gaddafi to do that.
And then Hillary Clinton had him killed.
But he is now the special assistant to the president and the senior director for proliferation strategy at the White House.
The one thing I know about Donald Trump is the one thing that truly scares him is nuclear war.
He does not want a missile launched because he firmly believes, and, you know, Eddie Jacobson will tell you in her book the same exact thing.
You launch a missile, you're guaranteed the other side's going to launch missiles, and then you're in a world of hurt.
You probably don't make it.
In every single test that they run, every scenario at the Pentagon since the 50s to today, it always ends in total nuclear war.
And so the one thing I know is he does not want any missiles going up in the air because he knows everybody lose.
Everybody loses with that.
So he's serious about nuclear weapons.
But what can we achieve with people we don't trust?
And how close are we to actually, are we going to hit them?
He's not going to tell me that, but I think we can draw our own conclusions by how he has behaved in the past and how he moves things and gives people a very narrow window.
And I don't think they're going to take this window, but we'll see.
Dual Sovereignty and the Constitution00:15:53
Let me tell you about Relief Factor.
Some people just sit.
No thought, no strategy, no, you know, hands on armrests like they're preparing for re-entry.
They lower themselves into a chair as if it's the most ordinary thing in the world, because for them it is.
And then other people, whole different process.
You know, timing, angles, little brace here, careful shift there.
You know, getting back up isn't much better at all.
This is what Relief Factor is for.
It's a daily supplement designed to help support your body's response to the inflammation for which a lot of people is a big part of, you know, those days that are your stiff, achy, and, you know, you just feel like crap all day.
It's not about doing something extreme.
It's about making the ordinary feel ordinary again, sitting down without a plan, getting up without a countdown, moving through your day without constantly being frustrated by pain getting in the way all the time.
Over a million people have tried Relief Factor.
Two-thirds of them have gone on to take more month after month.
I'm one of them because it works.
Don't wait.
If you're dealing with daily pain, launch your three-week quick start and see what Relief Factor can do for you.
Call 800 for Relief, 800, the number 4Relief, or relieffactor.com.
How will it feel to finally be out of pain?
Now back to the podcast.
This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.
And don't forget, rate us on iTunes.
I got to get warmed up for Keith Ellison.
Let me just start with what Keith has written.
He wrote a little op-ed about how Trump just hates Minnesotans because they love one another.
Aww, not cute.
I'm going to read this in my third grade voice.
Okay.
The president has gone after us because of who we are and what we value.
We have an obligation to resist.
Okay.
I can't read it like that.
I think I have to read it like I'm talking down to you because you have to be a moron to believe any of this.
Operation Metro Surge, the Trump administration's campaign that has targeted the city of Minneapolis and the state of Minnesota, which I serve as Attorney General.
That is incredible.
I just want you to remember, he's the attorney general of the state.
Okay.
You know, the one with all the corruption.
He's the chief law enforcement officer.
And I want you to keep that in mind because the guy has no idea how the country works.
Okay.
It appears to be the single largest deployment of immigration agents in the history of the United States.
This domestic invasion has inflicted tremendous damage on our state.
In addition, the 10th Amendment gives Minnesota dual sovereignty with the federal government.
Yet we have seen the White House try to force elected leaders to bend to its will rather than to will of the people of our state.
The federal government has deployed more than 3,000 masked and heavily armed agents to achieve what Congress or a court would never grant, coerced control over the politics of Minnesotans.
I can't wait to come back to that paragraph.
People may ask, why is Minnesota having to deal with this targeted oppression?
Well, one answer is that we voted against the president three elections in a row.
Something he has publicly said he resents deeply.
But there's a deeper, truer answer.
Trump has gone after us because of who we are and what we value.
Oh, man, that is so obvious.
You know what it reminds me of?
The smell of number seven.
Oh, you can't smell number seven.
Yes, exactly right.
This makes no sense whatsoever.
We welcome strangers, do you?
We see refugees as cherished members of our community, not as threats.
We take the vulnerable among us.
We want to be a great place for everyone to live, no matter where they come from.
Really?
If I move there, Texas, really?
And while we, of course, believe in the rule of law, we also believe that immigration is not a sin.
Well, I'm glad you're a preacher there at the end.
Okay, so Keith, I'm going to help you out a little bit because I got a chalkboard.
And the title of the chalkboard is Ellison's a Moron.
Okay.
Let's start with that paragraph that I love so dear about dual sovereignty with shared control.
What is he talking about there?
Dual sovereignty with shared control?
He's talking about the 10th Amendment, of course.
The phrase dual sovereignty.
Wow, that sounds powerful.
It does, all right?
But it doesn't mean that the states and the federal government share authority over immigration enforcement.
They don't.
Here's what dual sovereignty means.
States oversee state powers.
Federal oversees federal powers.
It's just that easy, okay?
Immigration, border control, naturalization, and removal, it's been settled repeatedly.
They are exclusively federal powers rooted in Article 1, the naturalization, Article 2, foreign relations, and the Supremacy Clause.
Now, I don't like this.
Yeah, wait until I get to point number two.
I'll tell you why I don't like it.
I don't like it, but it's settled law now.
You can cooperate with the federal government and help them with their enforcement or not cooperate.
You as a state can decline to assist, but you may not obstruct or veto or override federal immigration operations.
Settled, settled in the court of law, okay?
And that distinction matters because his argument assumes that Minnesota has a constitutional right to block the federal enforcement officers.
They don't.
Nowhere in the Constitution.
Nowhere.
Now, let me get to point number two, Keith, because this is where it gets kind of cute.
Kind of cute because you're pretending we don't really have memory.
Look, what I'm going to do is I'm going to cook something up and hope that no one in America has any memory at all.
They're all goldfish.
Unfortunately, a few of us do remember what you tried to do in Arizona.
If your position was correct, then Arizona should have won when it tried to secure its own border.
Do you remember that?
Because it was your side that said, wait, They can't secure their own border.
That's the federal government.
It's in the Constitution.
The federal government has all the power on that.
They can't do anything.
And Arizona said, wait a minute, you can't do that because they're not doing their job.
They weren't arguing that they had the right.
They were arguing that the federal government wasn't doing their job.
So somebody had to.
But no, you Democrats were like, no, no, no, they can't do anything.
It doesn't make any difference.
There are no borders.
There are no borders.
Okay.
So what happened?
Oh, well, we took it all the way to the Supreme Court and Supreme Court told us there are no borders.
Only the federal government could say there are borders.
Okay, so you won that.
Now, wait a minute.
I'm trying to understand.
The state of Arizona was trying to say that, no, the federal government isn't doing things and we have a right to protect our citizens.
And you said, no.
Okay, so now you're arguing that Minnesota can resist federal immigration enforcement on the sovereignty grounds, which don't exist for you, by the way, which contradicts the legal decisions that you defended against Arizona.
Here's why I like to say, you can't have it both ways.
Life's like a box of chocolate.
You just bit into one that's nasty.
Then he says, well, he's coercing control over state politics.
What?
What?
He's coercing.
Trump is coercing control over the politics of Minnesotans.
Really?
That's weird.
Because under the basic Constitution, you guys don't have any politics.
You say whatever you want, but you can't obstruct.
You cannot help all you want.
All you want.
Yeah.
But the Constitution says the federal government has that.
So if enforcing federal law were coerced political control, then, hey, Keith, I got an idea.
Let's play this one out.
Okay.
A federal government doesn't have the right to do anything.
That means the FBI is unconstitutional.
Yeah.
But wait, wait, wait.
You might even say, yeah, that's right.
The FBI is unconstitutional.
Uh-huh.
Uh-huh.
That would mean that desegregation orders would have violated state sovereignty in the 1960s.
That means all federal civil rights enforcement in the 60s would have been illegal because our federal government is trying to enforce it, but put its power down and wreck our politics.
Uh-huh.
Hmm.
Nope.
Nope.
Doesn't work, Keith.
You're a moron.
The masked agents, sending in mask agents.
Okay.
Here's what you should know because you're the attorney general.
You should know this.
If they wear masks or they carry rifles or they arrive in large numbers, 3,000 or two people, that doesn't have anything to do with the Constitution.
It has nothing to do with the Constitution.
Here's the question that does have something to do with the Constitution.
Are they enforcing federal law?
Are they acting within statutory authority?
Are they violating any constitutional rights?
If the answer of one and two is yes and three is no, then you got nothing.
You got nothing.
You're just, you want it your way and you can't handle it.
And what kills me is how you people will jump from one side of the Constitution to the other.
And sometimes, sometimes that happens.
You know, the Constitution, you know, what I love about the Constitution, and I know that it's right, is I don't always agree with it.
It doesn't always fall on my side.
You know what I mean?
And you're like, but when you expect it to fall on your side every time, that's a problem, not with the Constitution, that's a problem with you.
Okay?
When Arizona tried to secure its border, Democrats said only the federal government can do it.
When the federal government enforces immigration law in Minnesota, Democrats say states have a right to resist.
Both things cannot be true.
I'm happy.
I'm happy.
You tell me which one is true.
You tell me which one's true.
You want to make it states have a right to resist?
Okay, we'll make it states have a right to resist all the time.
All the time.
If you say, nope, they don't have a right to resist.
Great.
We'll say that.
All the time.
Keith, this isn't about compassion or cruelty, refugees or fear or Donald Trump or Minnesotan values.
This is about the Constitution of the United States.
And here's what it says.
The state can disagree.
The state may protest.
The state may refuse cooperation, but a state cannot veto something that falls under the 10th Amendment in the Constitution to the federal government.
That's how federal government, this federal government works.
That's how our constitution.
And I would think that maybe somebody who is an attorney general, do I got a uniform with that job?
You'd think that the attorney general, especially one that was at least on the sidelines involved with Arizona, would know that.
But see, you do know that.
You're either a moron or you're just a liar.
You decide.
You're streaming the best of the Glenn Beck program, and you can find full episodes wherever you download podcasts.
You know, there's something unique that is uniquely American about the Super Bowl.
I'm sorry, the reason why I'm having a hard time with this sentence is because this year it wasn't.
I mean, it was, it felt like Latin America.
It might as well have been a World Cup event.
But Super Bowl, generally speaking, is a very American experience.
And winning the Super Bowl, I mean, you know, you're on the Wheaties box.
Most of those players have come from nothing, nothing.
And they train their entire life.
They sacrifice their body for the rest of their lives.
You win the Super Bowl.
And if you win the Super Bowl in California, then they send you a bill that says, uh-oh, you lose.
Because the Super Bowl was played in California, that means California gets to tax the income earned in that game.
This is going to blow your mind.
Now, most people would go, okay, fair enough.
I mean, you know, whatever.
But that's not what California does because that's not enough money.
California reaches backward months into the past and they claim the right to tax a slice of your entire season salary based on how many duty days you spent in the state.
Okay.
So every day you're in the state, they reach back.
So they're not just taxing the bonus.
They're not taxing the game check.
They're taxing you the entire year.
So if you earn $178,000 for the Super Bowl, okay, that's what you get if you won, $178,000.
You end up owing the state more than that in taxes.
How can you lose money winning the Super Bowl?
Well, California's found a way to do it.
I mean, they are just, I mean, dumb as a box of rock.
Do you think the players don't have anything to say about where the Super Bowl is played?
I mean, yeah, you've got the whole front office, but if all the players are like, you know what, I'm not playing in California anymore, that's ridiculous.
Don't put the Super Bowl there.
Now, the players don't choose the venue.
They don't negotiate the location.
The Danger of the Jock Tax00:03:58
They didn't vote on California tax law.
They just showed up to work.
California calls this a jock tax.
But California takes it further than anyone.
If I work in New York City, I have to pay taxes to New York City and state for every day I broadcast from New York.
Oh, and they check.
They check.
But I have to pay just the day that I'm working.
And if I'm working there and broadcasting there, then I pay that.
And in California, they're giving you the highest marginal rate in the country.
It's over 13%, and they're thinking about raising it.
So I'm not asking you to cry for the millionaire quarterback.
That's not the point.
The point is the precedent that this is set.
No, no, no.
I'll get to the precedent in a second.
The point is, how stupid is California?
You are driving everyone with money away.
You would tax people, tax them, but you're taking away more than what they won by going?
That's nuts.
Precedent.
When a government decides it can tax income earned elsewhere, just because you happen to pass through, you're not taxing activity.
You're taxing existence.
That doesn't work out well.
Back in the 1970s, it was part of Cloward and Piven.
If you don't know who those are, well, soon you'll be able to find out with Glenn AI, but they're these crazy Marxist professors that they had this theory, hey, let's overwhelm the system and collapse the system.
And then we can have a beautiful Marxist one.
Well, that's what they did.
They didn't get the Marxism, but they collapsed New York in the 1970s because they had high taxes, aggressive enforcement.
You owe us because you were here.
What followed in the 1970s?
Capital flight, businesses leaving, a hollowed out tax base.
Why do you think Rush Limbaugh left?
Why do you think Sean Hannity left?
Why do you think I left?
Why do you think all of these people leave?
We were just the first out because we're like, I'm not paying that because I believe in small government and this is insane.
But when you start to have people who believe in big government go, this is insane.
In the 1970s, the city went nearly went bankrupt.
In France, we know this.
What did they do?
They imposed temporarily a wealth tax.
Well, I mean, I remember watching from over here going, well, that's just dumb as Bunge of Rock because who's going to stay in France?
You move out of France.
Well, that's exactly what happened.
The wealthy didn't pay more.
They left.
And by the time the government repealed the tax, tens of billions of dollars in capital already gone, along with all the jobs and the investment that came with it.
You know, that's the one thing you forget.
Have you ever worked for a guy who is poor?
I haven't worked for a single poor man my entire life.
Somebody who just didn't have any money, didn't pay any taxes because he just didn't have any money.
The only people that are hiring are people who have money.
You get rid of the people who have money.
Who's building businesses?
This is what happened in Rome, late empire.
They took productive citizens and just squeezed them.
Why?
Because they needed to, they were bloating the state.
They needed to pay for the giant state.
Tax base completely collapsed.
Economy followed.
Gone.
There is a lesson in every civilization that has tried this.
It learns this lesson the hard way.
You cannot tax people into staying.
You can only tax them into leaving.
And you can lower taxes to get them to move in.
Squeezing the Productive Class00:07:25
California is learning this in real time right now.
Six straight years of net population loss.
And what are they doing?
Hundreds of major companies are gone.
Film production is a thing of the past.
Billionaires are moving their resident where to Florida.
And instead of asking the question, what's happening here?
They just answer the same way.
Just tax what's left.
Tax what's left.
That's the danger of the jock tax mentality, because once you accept the idea that location alone gives the government to reach into your entire life, there is no limiting principle anymore.
Today, it's athletes.
Tomorrow it's remote workers, then investors, then anyone with assets connected it all to the state.
If, God forbid, that mindset ever goes national, when there's no Florida to run to, no Texas to escape to, that's when it's over, over for good.
I mean, the jock tax isn't insane because it punishes rich athletes.
It's insane because it teaches the government to believe if you pass through our borders, we own a piece of you.
And that idea never has ended well.
Never, not once, ever, ever, ever.
But that's not all California is doing.
Try this.
Valero.
Valero is gas stations, oil, oil refineries, okay?
You know, California, what is it they're already paying?
Let me look this up real quick.
Already, the national average for gas, national average for gas all around the United States is $2.88.
If you're living in a state where you're paying more than that, that's because of your state, okay?
$2.88.
California today is $4.36.
Holy cow.
Okay.
Now, that's for a lot of reasons.
But one of those is they make it impossible to refine oil.
You got to buy everything from out of state.
Nobody wants to do any business with them because they have to have their own special blends, which costs money, et cetera, et cetera.
Okay.
So Valero is a company that will do, will refine the oil the way they want it refined in California.
Okay.
So they decided, yeah, we're not going to do this anymore.
We're not going to do this.
We can't do this.
This is insane.
Now, remember, California is the home of what?
Okay, besides lunatics.
Besides progressives and high-tech, I got to, they're the home of high tech.
High-tech needs what in the future?
Energy.
They're getting rid of all of their energy.
Now they're getting rid of their pipelines.
They're getting rid of one of the only refineries.
Okay, 145,000 barrels per day.
They were going to leave in April.
They have just said, you know what, we can't take it anymore.
We're out.
We're just going to close it down.
Close it down.
They're walking away from like a billion dollar asset because they can't take California anymore.
They think that gas in California, once this is in effect, they believe gas will go up another dollar to $1.50 because of this one refinery.
And Gavin Newsom, you know what they did?
Well, we're going to have electric cars.
What are you producing the electricity on?
Because you won't do coal.
What are you producing it on?
Sunshine, uh-huh.
And your tan is real.
I mean, this is ridiculous.
This is ridiculous.
So now, because, and I told you this would happen, because they convinced everybody to get an electric car, they're having an energy crisis, but also what have they decided to do?
They've decided because you have an electric car, you're no longer paying that gasoline tax.
So they've just passed a bill where you have to pay by the mile.
You have to pay a tax, a mileage tax.
Okay?
Told you that would happen.
No, it won't.
No.
We're getting rid of the gas tax.
You're going to, where are they going to?
They have no money.
They have to have the money.
They'll tax anything.
If they can tax rain, they will.
They will.
I hate to even say that because you watch.
They will tax rain because they have to have the money.
There are five cities now in the U.S.
And I swear to you, if the federal government decides to bail these states and these cities out by using my federal tax dollar, I am going to hemorrhage out of my eyes.
I mean, it will be like I have an artery just behind my eyes that's just spew.
I bleed out in two minutes.
I won't be able to take the federal government saying, we have to bail out Los Angeles over my dead body, over my freaking dead body.
Not going to do it.
I don't care.
I won't pay my taxes.
I won't.
You are going to bail out Los Angeles?
No, we're not.
They did this.
We've warned them forever.
It's why I lived in Texas and why I lived in Florida and not in California.
Okay?
I gave up the beautiful California weather to get beautiful Florida weather by the water, but with 100% humidity, I gave that.
I'll accept that over the taxes because they're insane and they'll never stop.
You want me to bail them out?
No, I won't do that.
What do all these cities have in common?
Los Angeles, Houston, Philadelphia, Chicago, and New York City.
Those are the cities that are going to need a bailout soon because they can't do it anymore.
New York City, the residents there have the highest tax burden of $61,700.
Chicago, $42,600.
Philadelphia, $17,000.
Houston, $4,800.
Los Angeles, $1,300.
Los Angeles seems like a dream come true.
New York City has a tax burden for every resident of $61,700.
You're insane if you think that's going to work.
And you know what?
They've just hired a mayor who's insane.
And California, Los Angeles is about to do it again.
Somebody who is more progressive than the woman who's making out with Karl Marx and Fidel Castro, you know, while the fires are burning out of control.
Karl Marx and the Insane Mayor00:00:27
I'm just, I got my tongue down Karl Marx's throat right now.
I can't, I can't fight the.
Somebody who's like, yeah, I agree with her on a lot of stuff, but she doesn't go far enough.
Another Marxist is running, and I bet you they hire her.
I bet you they vote her in.
Oh, good luck.
Don't come to my door and ask me for a dime.
Unless you have Girl Scout cookies, I might buy a Girl Scout cookie.