Glenn Beck exposes the Fed’s hidden stash — and it’s worse than we thought



For years, Glenn Beck has called for the abolition of the Federal Reserve, arguing it’s nothing more than a private banking cartel that enables endless government spending, devalues the dollar through inflation, and secretly steals wealth from Americans via corrupt monetary policies.

But new evidence that just surfaced proves the problem is even worse than he thought.

To explain what’s been happening behind the American people’s back, Glenn gives an analogy.

“Imagine the U.S. economy is like one giant, never-ending house party that’s been raging for years, and the Federal Reserve is the bartender in charge of the punch bowl. The punch bowl, that’s liquidity, easy money flowing through the banks and the markets and the businesses,” he begins.

For years, the “punch” was overdistributed, making partygoers drunk and willing to make poor decisions. “This is when stocks and houses get wildly overpriced. Companies borrow stupid amounts ... and everybody starts to do stupid things,” Glenn says.

That’s exactly what happened in 2022 when the Federal Reserve “just printed a whole buttload of money,” he says.

But when things “got ugly,” it suddenly reversed course and announced an initiative called “quantitative tightening,” which essentially “drained the whole punch bowl.”

The Federal Reserve “needed to get rid of $2.3 trillion worth of bonds that they owned, and they said, ‘We’re just going to let them expire,”’ Glenn explains.

“In theory, this drains the money out of the system, makes it harder for you to get loans and everything else. Borrowing is more expensive. The bubbles will pop. It forces the economy to sober up.”

But this was just a ruse, Glenn says.

Instead of actually stopping the flow of “punch,” the Federal Reserve during the COVID-19 pandemic quietly redirected it instead.

“A lot of it ended up in a giant backroom keg called the overnight reverse repo facility. ... These are money market funds, big investors, big banks,” Glenn says, “and they parked about $2.5 trillion in for safekeeping, and they were earning a safe interest rate from the Fed.”

But then the backroom keg finally ran dry.

“By 2023, something had changed. The short-term Treasury bills (super safe government IOUs) started paying higher interest than the keg in the back room, so the big investors said, ‘Why are we letting all the alcohol sit in the keg? We can have a party elsewhere,”’ Glenn says. “So they started draining the backroom keg $100-$200 billion every single month, and they poured that money right back into stocks and bonds and lending.”

What was the result?

“More punch than we started with in the first place!” Glenn exclaims.

“That’s why the Dow Jones keeps hitting new highs, government keeps funding huge deficits. ... The bartender was pretending to cut off the drinks while secretly letting the elite guests go into the back room and get the hidden stash.”

These still-drunk elites, Glenn says, continue to “make stupid, dumb bets,” which just makes the “hangover worse” for the normies.

“Look out, gang — you’ve been lied to yet again,” he cautions, calling the Federal Reserve a “criminal organization” that is “stealing from the American people.”

“End the Fed,” he pleads.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

How Reforming Stock Market Rules Would Dramatically Boost America’s Middle Class

Just imagine how much it would help the middle class to enjoy access to America’s wealth engines again.

Jasmine Crockett Hit With Ethics Complaint Over Failure To Disclose Stock Holdings

Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D., Texas) may be in a world of legal trouble for concealing her ownership of stock in at least 25 companies from her congressional financial disclosures, according to a new complaint obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The post Jasmine Crockett Hit With Ethics Complaint Over Failure To Disclose Stock Holdings appeared first on .

Cracker Barrel's stock sinks after controversial 'woke rebrand'



Cracker Barrel Old Country Store made headlines this week after it unveiled a drastic rebrand, though not for positive reasons.

The 55-year-old chain replaced its iconic logo, which featured a man leaning against a barrel, with a more generic design that includes only the company's name.

'"Rebrand" all of that to something more modern, something more inclusive, and something that erases those feelings, and you're "rebranding" the SOLE reason why anyone goes there to begin with.'

The logo change comes after Cracker Barrel started changing its restaurant interiors last year. The updated look replaces the classic country style with a more modern design.

The update went viral online for all the wrong reasons, with many accusing the restaurant of going "woke."

"In college, I worked at @CrackerBarrel in Tallahassee. I even gave my life to Christ in their parking lot," Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) wrote in a post on social media. "Their logo was iconic and their unique restaurants were a fixture of American culture. No one asked for this woke rebrand. It's time to Make Cracker Barrel Great Again."

RELATED: Cracker Barrel ditches Americana as customers call for boycott over iconic brand change

Photo by: Jeffrey Greenberg/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Even Steak 'n Shake took a swipe at Cracker Barrel on social media.

"Sometimes, people want to change things just to put their own personality on things. At CB, their goal is to just delete the personality altogether. Hence, the elimination of the 'old-timer' from the signage. Heritage is what got Cracker Barrel this far, and now the CEO wants to just scrape it all away," the hamburger food chain wrote.

Though the company reportedly hired three marketing agencies to help with its redesign as part of a $700 million larger transformation plan, the public pushback appeared to negatively impact Cracker Barrel's stock.

Its shares fell nearly 15% during Thursday trading, dropping the restaurant's market value by $194.6 million, CBS News reported. Cracker Barrel regained some ground in the afternoon, with shares down roughly 13.9%.

RELATED: Cracker Barrel faces boycott over 'woke' post celebrating Pride month, pushing DEI initiatives with LGBTQ+ alliance

Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images

"Shareholders should be absolutely infuriated," conservative commentator Robby Starbuck stated.

"Bottom line: Wokeness destroys businesses."

He called for Cracker Barrel's CEO to be fired.

Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck said, "Cracker Barrel CEO Julie Felss Masino said on Good Morning America this week that people are thrilled about the [restaurant's] rebrand. I think she's lying."

"Woke ideology has changed our country in countless ways, some of which we may never get back. But Cracker Barrel has always represented the one thing I think so many Americans currently crave: NOSTALGIA," Beck continued. "You go to Cracker Barrel for the rocking chairs outside, the meals that taste like grandma's home cooking, and the simple game of Chinese checkers on the table."

"'Rebrand' all of that to something more modern, something more inclusive, and something that erases those feelings, and you're 'rebranding' the SOLE reason why anyone goes there to begin with," Beck added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Corporate America is eating its seed corn — and our future



“Don’t eat your seed corn.” Every farmer gets it. Every American with common sense gets it. The only people who don’t? The people who run corporate America.

A farmer keeps part of this year’s crop for planting next year. He could sell it now and pocket more cash — but then there’s nothing to plant, nothing to harvest, nothing to live on later. That’s obvious to anyone who works the land.

Capitalism creates wealth. But when wealth is extracted at the expense of the product, the people, and the future — that’s not capitalism. That’s predatory ransacking.

But in today’s boardrooms, the rule is reversed. Short-term profit is all that matters. Strip the future bare, cash out, and leave the mess for someone else to clean up.

The rewards for this corporate vandalism are massive: fat bonuses, stock windfalls, golden parachutes. The damage — lost jobs, gutted industries, shoddy products — is someone else’s problem.

And the fastest way to pull it off? Slash costs to the bone. Ship jobs overseas. Push out the people who know the business best. Wreck customer service. Kill innovation. Downgrade quality until the product barely passes as the same thing you used to make.

Private equity and corporate strategists have a new trick for squeezing customers dry: “revenue mining.” That means cross-selling, upselling, jacking up prices, and hiding the real costs in creative contracts.

At first, it works. Existing customers tend to stick around — inertia keeps them from bolting right away. But each gimmick drives off a slice of loyal business. Combine that with lower service quality and cheaper products, and the exodus accelerates. Before long, the company is stuck with an overpriced product, lousy service, and no easy way to attract new customers.

I’ve watched this play out in my own life. My exterminator. My alarm company. My HVAC service. All wrecked by the same formula. The local phone number? Redirected to a call center overseas — if I can navigate the phone tree. The people I used to know? Gone. The contract? Suddenly much more expensive.

The service I get for my trouble? Less than before. And when the tech finally arrives, all he says is, “Things are much different now.” They might wring one more payment out of me, but I’m already shopping for a local outfit that treats me like a customer instead of prey.

In short, they ate their seed corn. They got one fat harvest out of me, then pushed me straight into the arms of their competition — for good.

At least my dentist is still a one-man shop who owns his own business. But even dentistry is under siege. Private equity-backed dental chains are giving dentistry a bad name, pushing unnecessary procedures just to meet revenue targets.

A USA Today investigation titled “Dentists under pressure to drill ‘healthy teeth’ for profit” uncovered one such example:

Dental Express was part of North American Dental Group, a chain backed by private-equity investors. At least a year earlier, the company had told dentists like Griesmer to meet aggressive revenue targets or risk being kicked out of the chain. Those targets ratcheted up pressure to find problems that might not even exist.

In my professional career, I have seen too many examples of the same pattern: private equity buying and destroying great businesses that had loyal customer bases. To be fair, I have also seen examples of private equity groups buying a business, embracing its product, and continuing to provide good service. I wish it weren’t the exception, though.

More often, private equity groups treat the acquisition as a mine: extract the capital through dividends and existing customers while accruing significant debt. In fact, the funds used to purchase the business are often borrowed and never even repaid.

Dig until empty, leave a crater, and move on.

An X user put it perfectly:

Some private equity is genuinely investing in the business to grow a solid business. This is good, full stop.

Some private equity buys up dying businesses, breaks them up, sells off the valuable bits and sometimes lets the worthless bits go through bankruptcy, taking advantage of bankruptcy laws to profit. This is good, actually, as it recycles the resources of dying businesses into good businesses.

The third type of private equity buys good businesses that are doing OK or even doing well. Then they sell off all the assets, load the company up on as much debt as they can, pay themselves giant dividends, and then take advantage of the same bankruptcy laws to discharge all the debt so they never have to pay it back. This is really bad.

This isn’t just happening to small companies. It’s hitting America’s industrial backbone.

I’ve written before about how Carlos Tavares, the former CEO of Stellantis (corporate parent of Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep), awarded himself a $39 million compensation package for making short-term decisions that briefly maximized profit before revenue and sales collapsed, leaving dealers with overpriced, outdated inventory. He made off with the profits, then left behind a hollow pipeline for the dealers truly committed to Stellantis.

RELATED: Private equity’s losing streak is coming for your 401(k)

Greenseas via iStock/Getty Images

I also covered Boeing’s disastrous $43 billion stock buyback binge. The short-term boost to its share price came at the expense of critical investment in its products — and has cost the aerospace giant $35 billion since 2019. To plug the hole, Boeing had to raise another $15 billion in capital and push back the already overdue launch of the 777, citing “negligent engineering.”

That phrase used to be unthinkable in the aerospace industry. Boeing made it possible by gutting its engineering and technical staff to feed Wall Street.

The consequences keep coming. This month, United Airlines grounded much of its fleet after a failure in its proprietary “Unimatic” flight system. The airline claims it doesn’t know what caused the failure.

But I have a strong suspicion.

In recent years, United has aggressively outsourced its technical operations to contractors using foreign labor — often H-1B visa workers — at lower cost. One subcontractor, Vista Applied Solutions Group, boasts that it helps clients “increase productivity” while achieving “considerable cost savings.”

That’s great — until the system fails and planes can’t fly. United may have saved on salaries. The short-term reduction in salary expense has eaten United’s seed corn, leaving the company with a technology system that can’t keep its planes in the air.

It is imperative for those of us who defend capitalism to also repudiate those engaged in practices that give it a bad name. Capitalism creates wealth. But when wealth is extracted at the expense of the product, the people, and the future — that’s not capitalism. That’s predatory ransacking.

And it deserves our scorn.

'Sabotage': Trump attacks Hawley for pushing bill that would ban congressional and presidential stock trading



Numerous members of Congress have gotten fabulously rich making well-timed investments.

Multiple bills have been introduced in recent years that would ban congressional stock trading, including Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley's Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments Act — the PELOSI Act.

Despite the opposition from his Republican peers — Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), for instance, warned of possible "unintended consequences" — Hawley successfully got the bill through through the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

President Trump was none too pleased with his longtime Republican ally in the Senate, suggesting in a strongly worded Truth Social post that Hawley was a "second-tier Senator" being used by Democrats to undermine him in an apparent act of "sabotage."

Hawley reintroduced the PELOSI Act in April, noting, "Americans have seen politician after politician turn a profit using information not available to the general public. It’s time we ban all members of Congress from trading and holding stocks and restore Americans’ trust in our nation’s legislative body."

The name of the bill is a not-so-subtle jab at one of the most brazen alleged insider traders in Congress, California Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D), whose annual salary is now around $174,000 but who has a net worth of $263.39 million, according to Quiver Quantitative.

RELATED: Cory Mills vs. the truth: Top 10 times the GOP wunderkind played fast and loose with the facts

Photographer: Yuri Gripas/Abaca/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Last year, President Donald Trump demanded that Pelosi be prosecuted for alleged insider trading after her husband dumped 2,000 of his shares in Visa — valued at roughly $500,000 — two months before the company was sued by the Department of Justice for allegedly monopolizing the debit markets. Visa stock dropped by 5% following the announcement of the DOJ's civil antitrust suit.

Pelosi is certainly not alone.

In his Blaze Originals documentary, "Bought and Paid For: How Politicians Get Filthy Rich," James Poulos, the host of BlazeTV's "Zero Hour" and the editor at large of Blaze Media, highlighted some of the "most egregious transactions" members of Congress have directly or indirectly pulled off in recent years — like making big investments in defense contractors on the eve of the war in Ukraine — without remorse or consequence.

Around the time of its reintroduction, Trump indicated that he would support such a ban.

However, the bill debated in committee on Wednesday would not just bar lawmakers in Congress and their spouses from buying, selling, or holding individual stocks while in office — it would apply to the American president and vice president as well.

'Members of Congress should be focused on delivering results for their constituents, not returns on investments.'

Trump told reporters on Wednesday that he likes the legislation "conceptually," adding that "Nancy Pelosi became rich by having inside information. She made a fortune with her husband, and I think that's disgraceful. So in that sense, I'd like it, but I'd have to really see — you know I study these things very carefully, and this just happened, so I'll take a look at it."

A White House official speaking to the New York Times on the condition of anonymity claimed that Hawley blindsided the president's team with the bill, the original version of which would have reportedly required Trump and Vance to sell off their investments starting in 2027.

Hawley changed the bill so that officeholders would not have to divest until the beginning of their next terms, meaning Trump would be exempt.

— (@)

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) criticized the change, suggesting that the prohibition "should apply to everybody or nobody."

Nevertheless, the bill passed committee 8-7 — with all Republicans but Hawley voting in opposition.

After the vote, Hawley said in a statement, "Members of Congress should be focused on delivering results for their constituents, not returns on investments. It's time to find out where members stand. It’s time we restore trust in Congress and ban all members from trading and holding stocks."

RELATED: House Ethics clears GOP lawmaker of insider trading, calls for stock divestments anyway

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Trump subsequently attacked Hawley on Truth Social, writing, "The Democrats, because of our tremendous ACHIEVEMENTS and SUCCESS, have been trying to 'Target' me for a long period of time, and they're using Josh Hawley, who I got elected TWICE, as a pawn to help them. I wonder why Hawley would pass a Bill that Nancy Pelosi is in absolute love with."

Trump suggested further that Hawley "is playing right into the dirty hands of the Democrats. It’s a great Bill for [Pelosi], and her 'husband,' but so bad for our Country! I don't think real Republicans want to see their President, who has had unprecedented success, TARGETED, because of the 'whims' of a second-tier Senator named Josh Hawley!"

The president also took issue with Hawley for siding with Democrats against Florida Republican Sen. Rick Scott's attempt to add a report of controversial stock trading by Pelosi and her family to the bill — a possible deal-breaker for Democrats — and to add an exemption for the president and vice president.

When asked for comment on whether Trump's view changed in light of Hawley's alteration to the bill, the White House referred Blaze News back to the president's Truth Social post.

A poll conducted in 2023 by the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation found that 86% of Americans favored barring members of Congress and their family members from trading stocks. When broken down by political affiliation, 87% of Republican respondents, 88% of Democratic respondents, and 81% of independents supported the proposal.

The poll found that 87% of Americans also supported prohibiting the president, the vice president, and Supreme Court justices from trading stocks in individual companies.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!