Dec. 9, 2020 - Bannon's War Room
48:28
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
Well, the virus has now killed more than a hundred people in China and new cases have been confirmed around the world. | |
| You don't want to frighten the American public. | ||
| France and South Korea have also got evacuation plans. | ||
| But you need to prepare for and assume. | ||
| Broadly warning Americans to avoid all non-essential travel to China. | ||
| That this is going to be a real serious problem. | ||
| France, Australia, Canada, the US, Singapore, Cambodia, Vietnam, the list goes on. | ||
| Health officials are investigating more than a hundred possible cases in the US. | ||
| Germany, a man has contracted the virus. | ||
| The epidemic is a demon and we cannot let this demon hide. | ||
| Japan, where a bus driver contracted the virus. | ||
| Coronavirus has killed more than 100 people there and infected more than 4,500. | ||
| We have to prepare for the worst, always, because if you don't and the worst happens, War Room. | ||
| Pandemic. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Sean, you make a really important point here. | ||
| It is the responsibility of state legislature, per the Constitution, to set the rules for election of electors. | ||
| And in this case, those were overridden, in the four states we're talking about, were overridden by other officials, whether they were judges or other governmental officials, and that's not the way our Constitution works, and that's the challenge we have in front of the court. | ||
| Can this be overridden by people who are not responsible under the Constitution for doing this? | ||
| I know you're here because you love Donald Trump and he loves you. | ||
| You're here because we the people will not let them steal our vote. | ||
| We will not let them steal our freedom. | ||
| Every lie will be revealed. | ||
| And on January the 20th of 2021, Donald J. Trump will be sworn in as president of the United States of America. | ||
| There's a new poll out that said that 53% of the American people believe that the election was free and fair, but that 47% of the people, almost 50% of the people, 47% of the people do not, and they have questions. | ||
| They want those questions answered. | ||
| Live from the nation's capital, you're in the War Room. | ||
| It's 9 December, the year of our Lord, 2020, one day after Safe Harbor. | ||
| We've got a lot to get to today, so we're going to get right with it. | ||
| We've got Boris Epstein, we've got a ton of lawyers, a lot of analysts, also going to talk about the CCP and their infiltration into the United States, and of course the big steal. | ||
| I want to go now to Boris Epstein from the campaign. | ||
| Boris, thank you so much for joining us tonight. | ||
| You're fighting on a multiple state battlefield from Nevada to Arizona to Wisconsin. | ||
| I'd like to go to this Nevada situation last night, where Jesse Bunnell, the lawyer that was Sidney Powell's partner on the Mike Flynn case, had a, I think, an incredible bill of indictment. | ||
| And last night, I think it got turned down by the Supreme Court, but there's this confusion about the actual evidence and the ability to actually present In a methodical way, the evidence that was out there of illegal voting activity, the people, and I think it was 41,000 people who were not registered in the state. | ||
| Can you give us an update on Nevada before we talk about this Texas situation? | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| It's great to be with you. | ||
| Always great to talk to your listeners and viewers. | ||
| Here's what happened in Nevada. | ||
| The Nevada State Supreme Court Gave the Republican Party of Nevada and the Trump campaign about two hours to present a brief and then didn't give an opportunity to argue the case in front of the court before issuing its ruling. | ||
| So looking at all options there, as you said, there was extensive voter fraud, extensive voter irregularity that was laid out in the brief, in the filings from the Trump campaign there. | ||
| You know, Adam Laxalt's been doing a great job there, Rick Grinnell, Matt Schlapp and others. | ||
| And the numbers have been staggering in Nevada in terms of people who are not registered, who don't live in Nevada, voting in Nevada, dead people voting in Nevada, people who didn't prove their citizenship voting in Nevada. | ||
| So it is unfortunate that the Nevada State Supreme Court decided to act so swiftly and not allow the Trump campaign, President Trump, the appropriate due process to present the case of what actually happened in Nevada. | ||
| So have to consider all options. | ||
| In terms of what to do next to ensure that the legal votes in Nevada are counted and used to decide which electors are sent from Nevada. | ||
| Talk to us about, so where do you go from here? | ||
| If that's in state court and you've got this very compelling case in Nevada, what are your options now? | ||
| Where do you guys go? | ||
| Because that evidence has got to be produced, it's got to be shown in court because it's so compelling about the illegal voting. | ||
| Well, the standard options for any case, right? | ||
| If something is in state court, does not get appropriate due process, as this did not here, the choices are then obviously to go and look at federal court or appeal once again and ask for the court to reconsider. | ||
| For the state court to reconsider. | ||
| So, Jesse Bernal and his team are evaluating all those options as we speak. | ||
| And this decision just came down late last night. | ||
| Another reason why it's a bit strange the way that Nevada State, more than a bit, it's strange the way the Nevada State Supreme Court handled this. | ||
| You would think that if you are the state Supreme Court, the highest court in the state, you would want to give yourself legitimacy and allow for arguments, allow for the constitutional process to take its course, to take place. | ||
| But, you know, using potentially the safe harbor date as an excuse, which now has come and gone, as we've talked about with you over the last 24 to 48 hours, the state Supreme Court did what it did, unfortunately, and did not allow for the constitutional due process, for the ability to present this overwhelming evidence in front of the court. | ||
| So the choices are, again, pushing for reconsideration in the state court or potentially considering the federal court options. | ||
| Look, you've got, I think, a hearing tomorrow in Wisconsin. | ||
| You've got a very compelling case there. | ||
| Very important, yes. | ||
| But let's go to Texas. | ||
| I know you're pressed for time. | ||
| We started the show with the Attorney General of Texas on Sean Hannity last night. | ||
| And it looks like President Trump tweeted out something this morning. | ||
| I don't know if you're intervening, joining. | ||
| There's states coming on. | ||
| It looks like Louisiana, Missouri now, South Carolina. | ||
| And some are giving verbal support and I think others are actually thinking, of joining into the case itself. | ||
| Can you give us an update on your thinking about this Texas situation? | ||
| Broad support for the Texas case. | ||
| Broad support. | ||
| And Attorney General Ken Paxton, whose clip you played at the beginning of the show, lays it out very well. | ||
| The United States Constitution specifically lays out who is in charge of presidential elections in this country. | ||
| It is state legislatures. | ||
| It is not secretaries of state. | ||
| It's not governors. | ||
| It's not courts. | ||
| It's state legislatures. | ||
| And it's incumbent upon the United States Supreme Court to enforce that, to take a look at what's happened in these states, and if there's been a contravention of that, to rule that there has been. | ||
| So, it's very encouraging to see so many great states across the country joining in this case, supporting it, or actually taking part as Missouri and others are saying they would like to take part in the case, and the President expressed his overwhelming support for the case this morning as well. | ||
| Is that what we should interpret the tweet that says we're going to intervene in this? | ||
| That is a show of support by the President for this process? | ||
| Well, it's undoubtedly a show of support for the Texas case in terms of anything that comes beyond that. | ||
| I don't want to get ahead of the president. | ||
| But again, the campaign in terms of the Texas suit, in terms of the suits of the specific case and the legislative process is exhausting each and every option. | ||
| And to your listeners and viewers, you know, some people can look at the mainstream media and say, well, you know, they're pointing to these specific court cases. | ||
| But you have to remember that in 2000, In 2000, in Bush v. Gore, President Bush lost in the Florida Supreme Court and went up to the U.S. | ||
| Supreme Court, and that's when it ruled the way it did, and he became president. | ||
| So, these specific court rulings are not as important as the ultimate ruling, either of the Supreme Court or the decisions by the state legislators to do the right thing, call themselves into special session, and determine who their electors should be based on the legal vote. | ||
| And I would point to the fact that Most of the mainstream media said, well, this December 8th date is the hard, locked-in date. | ||
| Nothing can go on beyond that. | ||
| Well, guess what? | ||
| The litigation continues, the election contests continue, and the fight to count every legal vote continues. | ||
| Before we let you go, anything else that people should look for today or tomorrow as far as the work that you're doing in any of the individual specific states? | ||
| Absolutely concentrated on Georgia, the lawsuit filed in Georgia. | ||
| Even some of the critics like Eric Erickson have laid out that the suit filed in Georgia was extremely specific and has a very, very good chance of going all the way in terms of ensuring that Georgia counts the legal votes and sends the correct electors. | ||
| Look at the action going on in Michigan. | ||
| Remember, 71% of absentee precincts in Wayne County, Michigan, were not balanced. | ||
| We continue to work on the state of Michigan. | ||
| And in Pennsylvania, interestingly, we talked about this yesterday, but it appears that the ruling by the Supreme Court was to deny an injunction in the Mike Kelly case, not to deny certiorari. | ||
| So they're still considering that Mike Kelly and Sean Parnell and others' lawsuit in Pennsylvania. | ||
| Okay, we're going to be joined by Thomas King III in a second. | ||
| Boris, quickly, how do people get you on Instagram, Parler, Twitter, all of it? | ||
| How do people stay up to date with what you're doing during the day? | ||
| The gram for a lot of fun pictures, Boris underscore Epstein. | ||
| Twitter, at Boris EP. | ||
| I think I'm actually about to hit 100,000 followers literally as we speak. | ||
| Parler, the one and only, at Boris. | ||
| Steve, thanks so much to you. | ||
| Thanks for having me. | ||
| Thanks to your listeners and viewers. | ||
| Keep up the fight! | ||
| Boris Epstein, from the campaign, we certainly will. | ||
| What is it? | ||
| Every lie will be revealed, as the great Lin Wood says. | ||
| Now I want to bring in Thomas King III, one of the lawyers that's helping with the Amistad Project and the Thomas More Society, doing this tremendous work up in Pennsylvania and other places. | ||
| Thomas, can I ask you first about, Sean Parnell is going to be on later, about what Boris said about, can you just clarify, because I think yesterday When Justice Alito came out on the Parnell-Kelly case in Pennsylvania, there was not just a lot of hand-wringing, I think it was kind of a mini-meltdown. | ||
| Can you explain exactly what happened in your mind in that case and where does it actually stand? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes, that was pretty much what was just said, Steve. | |
| What was denied was the emergency motion, so Mike Kelly and Sean Parnell are correct. | ||
| The emergency motion was denied. | ||
| CERT has not been dealt with yet, and so there is still the possibility that the court will in fact take up that particular case. | ||
| So the case is not dead, but certainly we would have liked to have had the emergency The emergency motion granted, that would have been better, but it's not dead, it's still there, and it's a really legitimate issue. | ||
| Will Parnell and Kelly join in with Texas? | ||
| Isn't that a subset of this Texas complaint, or do you think it's better to keep it independent right now? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think that it's so urgent that I think that Mike Kelly is my friend and so is Sean Parnell. | |
| I've represented both of them at various times. | ||
| So my counsel to them would be, if they can, to join in the Texas suit and to add their voices to that particular action. | ||
| There's also a lot of talk about various legislatures Joining the suit, including perhaps even some of those in the named defendant states. | ||
| So, we'll see what happens. | ||
| I think there is a lot of support for that action filed by the Attorney General of Texas. | ||
| And my hat's off to him. | ||
| I think, I hope that the other states will join. | ||
| I hope that other legislatures will join. | ||
| And if Kelly and Parnell can join, I think that they should. | ||
| Let me just go back, I want to make sure. | ||
| Because of the urgent nature of it, was Alito not signaling, because this is what a lot of people on the left said, he was basically saying they weren't going to take this up. | ||
| Do you buy that, or do you think there's still a possibility? | ||
| Just the case on its own merits, on its own. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think there's still a possibility. | |
| I mean, the problem, the legal, the technical legal problem with that case is that it's a decision of the highest court in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania deciding an issue that's raised under its own constitution. | ||
| So that's always a problem for a court. | ||
| For the United States Supreme Court to overrule a state court on that basis. | ||
| But there is certainly is a larger issue in that case that doesn't necessarily require the court to overcome the PA Supreme Court. | ||
| The larger issue is that these things were done in Pennsylvania. | ||
| In the same way that the Attorney General of Texas is talking about, and that is that there's a pattern of these particular cases being decided not by the legislatures of the states, but rather by the courts of these states. | ||
| So, it's not necessarily second-guessing whether they were right or wrong. | ||
| It's saying that, in fact, they did this, and that by doing it, they have affected this election in a terrible way in Pennsylvania. | ||
| Thomas, hang on one second. | ||
| We're going to keep you over a short break. | ||
| No, we've got to let you go. | ||
| A short break. | ||
| Come back for a few minutes and get down to the bottom of this. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Thomas King III will rejoin us on the other side of a short commercial break. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
| Pandemic. | ||
| With Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| The epidemic is a demon and we cannot let this demon hide. | ||
| War Room. | ||
| Pandemic. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Okay, we're on with Thomas King III, one of the lawyers up in Pennsylvania, working with Amistad Project and the Thomas More Society in some of these amazing lawsuits. | ||
| Thomas, how real is this lawsuit from Texas? | ||
| It kind of hit as a bombshell the other night, but as a lawyer, do they have standing? | ||
| How real is this, or is this just some individual attorney general's grandstanding? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I think anything that comes from the Attorney General of Texas has a lot of merit to, a lot of weight to it. | |
| It's well done. | ||
| It's well written. | ||
| It certainly is unusual. | ||
| But listen, this is this is the election of the President of the United States. | ||
| There is there is a procedure that the Texas Attorney General is following. | ||
| So he's doing it correctly. | ||
| And if we could get additional people to join onto it, I mean, the larger it gets, the more Credible it is so it's it's credible to begin with the issues that are raised are real They arise under the United States Constitution and Ken Paxton is absolutely right in what's happening And what he's filed so my hats off to him. | ||
| He's he's done a real service here And I hope that he's successful and anything we can do to support him we will You mentioned earlier in the last segment that you think there may actually be some of the state legislatures that are actually called out in this suit. | ||
| You think some of those may actually join the lawsuit? | ||
|
unidentified
|
That that's the discussion that's going on at this time among various people as to whether or not that can happen. | |
| So I think there's a call out there for people to do that, whether they will or whether they can. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| For example, we have a problem in Pennsylvania because our legislature is not in session. | ||
| They go out of session on November 30. | ||
| They don't come back in until January. | ||
| So there are certainly logistics problems that way, but there are calls for people to do that. | ||
| And there's a discussion going on about that. | ||
| There's also a discussion going on about whether to bring an action. | ||
| I think there's a lot of discussion. | ||
| This fight's not over. | ||
| This dog's still alive. | ||
| We support the president. | ||
| As long as he's in it, we're in it. | ||
| here. So I think there's a lot of discussion. This fight's not over. | ||
| This dog's still alive. We support the president and you know as long as he's in it we're in it and that's you know there's a lot of stuff still going on Steve. | ||
| Last thing, the president tweeted out this morning that he's going to intervene or maybe the campaign's going to intervene. | ||
| Would it be positive for the campaign to join the suit, or do you think it's better for the states and the state legislatures to go at this and have the campaign just step back and let things happen? | ||
|
unidentified
|
My take on it, and this is just me, but my take on it is that I think the President ought to intervene. | |
| I think that the legislatures that can and have the courage to do that ought to intervene. | ||
| I think the states that want to join. | ||
| I think everybody and their brother ought to intervene and join in this. | ||
| We're being led by Texas. | ||
| Those lawyers are excellent. | ||
| The Attorney General is a brilliant man, and he'll take the lead. | ||
| But I think the more support we have, the better. | ||
| Just right before we let you go, YouTube I think has come out and said since the Safe Harbor deadline passed yesterday, they're going to start pulling down all videos that talk about stealing the election or talk about information related to contesting this election right now. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Do you think that's a little preliminary? | |
| I think it is. | ||
| Not only is it preliminary, it's just more of the same stuff that we got from Zuckerberg and these other oligarchs that control the media. | ||
| So it's all the more reason that we need a Republican Congress and a Republican President to get rid of the exemptions that these people carry, and I think the President's absolutely right on that one as well. | ||
| Thomas King III, thank you very much. | ||
| Great work as a lawyer, and thank you very much for coming on the show. | ||
| Audience really loves you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thanks for having me, Steve. | |
| I appreciate it. | ||
| Okay, Thomas King III, one of the great lawyers working with Phil Klein and the team over there at the Thomas More Society and the Amistad Project. | ||
| I want to go now to Georgia and bring, I think there's something we're going to, the staff that my producers want me to read, I'm going to have to get this, is this from, we have John Fredericks on? | ||
| Should I read this? | ||
| And now this is from YouTube, right? | ||
| So I just want to read this on YouTube. | ||
| This is a quote from them, and John Fredericks to just follow along here. | ||
| This is YouTube. | ||
| Yesterday was the safe harbor deadline for the U.S. | ||
| presidential election and enough states have certified their election results to determine a president-elect. | ||
| Given that, we will start removing any piece of content Uploaded today or anytime after that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors change the outcome of the 2020 U.S. | ||
| presidential election, in line with our approach towards historical U.S. | ||
| presidential elections. | ||
| For example, we will remove videos claiming that a presidential candidate won the election due to widespread software glitches or counting errors. | ||
| We will begin enforcing this policy today and ramp up in weeks to come. | ||
| So I think that's a warning for the truth tellers here that are going to look. | ||
| We're going to play this out until that time when it's determined and it's not finally determined. | ||
| You have court cases. | ||
| You have cases in Wisconsin right now. | ||
| You have cases in Nevada, right, that are probably going to go into federal court. | ||
| You have cases that are going to go to the Supreme Court by the state of Texas. | ||
| It looks like people are joining in. | ||
| We just heard from Thomas King that state legislators Are now talking about their state legislatures that are on the receiving end of the lawsuits may join in. | ||
| So, this is far from over. | ||
| This is far from over. | ||
| Remember, the only date that's hardwired into the Constitution is high noon on the 20th of January. | ||
| In the worst case there, If one of the two individuals that have gotten electoral votes are not selected by that time, either through the Electoral College or a contingent election, which is still a big possibility. | ||
| YouTube is still a big possibility to have a contingent election. | ||
| If that's not done, the worst case is that Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, or if she's selected as Speaker of the House on the 5th, she becomes acting president until that time that one of the two that got electoral votes are selected by the House of Representatives, voting by state delegation. | ||
| So we have a long way to go on this thing. | ||
| And there's a lot of people trying to get evidence into court and trying to argue this thing out. | ||
| And so, no, for YouTube to make that determination, look, we are not going to stop. | ||
| We are going to hold the line and we are going to be relentless. | ||
| And we are not going to stop. | ||
| And if it gets pulled down, then we'll have to look at what remedies are out there. | ||
| But that's the quote, that's what they sent today, and people are running around with their hair on fire. | ||
| But we're not going to back off this one iota. | ||
| We're on Real America's Voice. | ||
| I want everybody to go to the Real America's Voice. | ||
| The guys got their own independent platform. | ||
| Go to Real America's Voice. | ||
| That's the power of what the Real America Voice team has built over there. | ||
| So we're going to be up every day. | ||
| The podcast now is what, over 22 million? | ||
| And the more they understand something, the more they try to suppress this, the more the American people are going to demand. | ||
| Right now, in independent polling, it's about 52-48, 53-47, right? | ||
| 52-48, 53-47, right? 53% of the people in Georgia think that if you look at the cross tabs of Trafalgar, which did a pretty good job in the presidential election, 53% think there were illegal activity that affected the outcome. | ||
| 53% of Georgians. | ||
| 58% want a special session. | ||
| Not that they're going to get it because of the cowardice of their elected officials down there in the Senate and in the House, although if you go to Gateway Pundit and others, they're playing up this proclamation that the Senate put out last night. | ||
| That's the end of it. | ||
| I want to bring in John Fredericks. | ||
| John, thank you for joining me and thank you for sitting through my harangue. | ||
| You're down in Georgia. | ||
| You were there yesterday. | ||
| What's the latest status? | ||
| Because I go on some of the sites and people are excited about the proclamation that the Senate put out that they're going to get to the bottom of it. | ||
| They want to have hearings. | ||
| But what exactly is going on? | ||
| Are we burning daylight down there? | ||
| And didn't they make a decision that they're too cowardly to actually call a special session? | ||
| Land of the Quizzlings is what is going on in the State Senate. | ||
| The statement that they put out is a complete toothless joke made to placate people. | ||
| It got picked up by the media as if they did something special. | ||
| They did absolutely nothing. | ||
| They're not going to do anything. | ||
| The GBI is not going to take this up. | ||
| They had an opportunity yesterday, the State Senate had a huge opportunity in Atlanta to do step one of a special session that was Granted to them by the United States Constitution, where both houses need 50% plus one in order to convene a special session around the presidential election, which is all they wanted to do. | ||
| Senate needed 29 votes, House needed 91. | ||
| The Senate got 12 votes, and then it collapsed. | ||
| And they begged out of it and put out this ridiculous statement. | ||
| The four people that brought the petition declined to sign the press statement that went out by the caucus. | ||
| But here's how stupid they think we are. | ||
| The second line of that thing, if you read it, says we couldn't have a special session because we couldn't get to three-fifths as the Georgia Constitution demands. | ||
| Well, this was the U.S. | ||
| Constitution, which trumps Georgia. | ||
| Period. | ||
| And so the fact that they put that out, the House, the Senate leadership put that out immediately in the second paragraph is what everybody hid behind. | ||
| My callers who are calling their senators that wouldn't back this kept telling him, hey it doesn't matter we can't get to three-fifths. | ||
| We can't get the two Democrats we need to sign on. | ||
| They never had to get the three-fifths. | ||
| They knew that, so they're just misleading the people. | ||
| The Senate leadership, led by President Pro Tempore Butch Miller, I'm going to call them out, Majority Leader Mike Dugan, And the Cosmo man, Lieutenant Governor Jeff Duncan, are the ones we have been told by people that were there that said they didn't want this to happen. | ||
| They were threatening people's committee assignments. | ||
| They said they would get blackballed. | ||
| All this went on yesterday, I've been told by a number of people. | ||
| All these senators wanted with this petition was to be able to get to a session with the electors, And they could have one of three outcomes. | ||
| Either certify Biden, certify Trump, or don't certify anybody. | ||
| Whether or not it would have made a difference, as some of the senators on my show were saying today, well, it didn't matter what, you know, Biden was going to win anyway. | ||
| That doesn't matter. | ||
| Stand up and do the right thing. | ||
| John, hang on. | ||
| We want to keep you over the break just for a second, okay? | ||
| Short break. | ||
| John Frege is going to return on the other side. | ||
| And Sean Parnell. | ||
| War Room. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Pandemic. | |
| With Stephen K. Banham. | ||
| The epidemic is a demon, and we cannot let this demon hide. | ||
| War Room. | ||
| Pandemic. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Banham. | ||
| Okay, let's return to Georgia and John Frederick. | ||
| So, John, what are the Senators... when you left, you were saying something, the Senators were making some excuse that it didn't matter. | ||
| What were they saying? | ||
| Well, they were basically saying, number one, they didn't have enough time. | ||
| Number two, they couldn't get to three-fifths. | ||
| Number three, even if they went, they couldn't do anything. | ||
| And number four, constitutional lawyers were coming into their retreat yesterday saying that having this special session with 29 votes would get challenged and it was illegal. | ||
| So, of course, those lawyers were brought in by Senate leadership, President Butch Miller, Majority Leader Mike Dugan, and Lieutenant Governor Cosmo Man Jeff Duncan. | ||
| All of these people didn't want anything to do with this special session, which the President had asked for. | ||
| The President called Speaker of the House David Ralston on Monday, talked to him for 15 minutes. | ||
| We understand that the Speaker said, hey, if the Senate gets 29, I can get to 91. | ||
| That's what was reported back. | ||
| There's a House hearing tomorrow in Atlanta. | ||
| I'll be at that. | ||
| But I got to tell you, the letter that was sent out by The Senate caucus, the Republican Senate caucus, which is being played up in the media, was absolutely pathetic, it was misleading, and basically the leadership of the Georgia Senate Thinks their voters are stupid, like they can't figure this out, or they don't have a computer, or they can't read what the U.S. | ||
| Constitution is. | ||
| So they hide behind the three-fifths rule, which had nothing to do with the petition put forth by Senators Beach, Ligon, Dolezal, and Jones, right? | ||
| But they were supposed to get to 29. | ||
| The farthest they ever got was 12. | ||
| And then some of those people backed out because they started to get threatened. | ||
| That's what I heard today. | ||
| I didn't hear it myself. | ||
| But they wouldn't get a chairmanship. | ||
| They'd get kicked off of committees. | ||
| And the normal thing that happens. | ||
| You're down there, 12-state, 12-city tour in 12 days. | ||
| You've been there over a month. | ||
| You've moved your headquarters down there temporarily to get focus on this Georgia. | ||
| How did this, the fiasco that happened yesterday, what impact has it had on the Deplorables' enthusiasm for the 5th of January? | ||
| I got to tell you, Steve, if the election were held today, if they don't do something, both these Senators are going to lose, and Perdue just, he doesn't get it. | ||
| Kelly Loeffler, bless her heart, she's really too green to understand what this movement is about, so I give her a pass. | ||
| Purdue, though, knows enough. | ||
| He doesn't get it. | ||
| I don't know, they're listening to their consultants here. | ||
| But, Steve, the callers I'm getting, if you tune into my show 6 to 10, Monday to Friday, download my app, the Georgia callers I'm getting are absolutely outraged. | ||
| I mean, the anger gets bigger and bigger by the day. | ||
| We had callers today saying, look, I'm simply not participating. | ||
| On January 5th. | ||
| Why? | ||
| Number one, you don't stand up for me. | ||
| Number two, my vote doesn't matter. | ||
| Because number three, you're doing nothing to change the cheating, which they're going to do again. | ||
| In fact, the Secretary of State, Raffensperger, just authorized another 20 drop boxes for January 5th. | ||
| That's like adding another 20 precincts. | ||
| And as we reported in GeorgiaStarNews.com, these have They don't have any chain of custody. | ||
| I've never seen anything like this, and yet the state leaders in Georgia are giving the New Jersey salute to their entire constituency and saying, we don't care what you say, we're not going to go forward with this, we just want to move on and have it all go away. | ||
| Unbelievable. | ||
| John, we've got to bounce. | ||
| How do people get access to you? | ||
| Best thing is, download my app if you have an iPhone or Android. | ||
| Go to Google Play or App Store, put in John Frederick Show, download my app, 6 to 10, Monday to Friday, you're good to go. | ||
| Okay, thank you. | ||
| Amazing reporting and coverage down in Georgia. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| I want to now go to an American patriot, an American hero, Sean Parnell. | ||
| He was an officer in Afghanistan during the war, awarded two Bronze Stars, also had the longest combat tour, I think over 400 days, in eastern Afghanistan, which is one of the snake pits of the world. | ||
| Sean, you've been at the Cutting edge in the front line of defending America, defending American values and freedom. | ||
| And you're once again called to do that now in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. | ||
| You're one of the co-parties to this lawsuit. | ||
| Yesterday there was a meltdown when Alito came out and I guess ruled against your emergency injunction. | ||
| Does your suit have legs and does it have life? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think it does. | |
| Yeah, we had a minor setback yesterday, but it's really important for people to understand that the only thing that was denied from Justice Alito in the Supreme Court yesterday was emergency injunctive relief. | ||
| And what we had asked the court to do, which we thought was eminently reasonable, was Was basically temporarily halt the certification of Pennsylvania's election while we debate the merits of whether or not Act 77 is constitutional. | ||
| Now, Act 77, for your viewers, it's the no-excuse absentee ballot law that was passed in Pennsylvania in 2019, October of 2019. | ||
| So this was pre-pandemic, right? | ||
| It represents the most radical change in Pennsylvania's elections process in the history of our Commonwealth. | ||
| And the case that we make is that it's facially unconstitutional. | ||
| This is just a black letter of the law kind of case. | ||
| And because, you know, the past sweeping electoral change in the state of Pennsylvania, you can't just do it with a piece of legislation. | ||
| You've got to actually amend the PA Constitution. | ||
| Which means that it had to be voted on in back-to-back legislative sessions. | ||
| It had to be advertised in two different newspapers in every county in the state all across the country. | ||
| And the most important part, as I've said on your show before, Steve, is that it had to go on the ballot for a referendum so that the people could have a say in how they want elections conducted. | ||
| This is about having faith in the system. | ||
| This is about our lawsuit is about making sure that our elections are conducted in accordance with the state constitution and the federal constitution, because those two documents protect us all from government overreach. | ||
| And that's exactly what happened with Act 77. | ||
| So that's the case that we presented, by the way, in three separate courts. | ||
| I'm going to go off for a little bit here, Steve. | ||
| But in the United States of America, we presented our case. | ||
| On the merits to three courts, right? | ||
| Only one of them have heard the case on the merits. | ||
| And in that instance, in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, Judge McCullough said, if this case proceeds on the merits, the constitutional merits, we are likely to succeed. | ||
| Now, the PA Supreme Court did not hear our case on the merits. | ||
| They dismissed my case basically on a legal doctrine called latches, which basically asserted that I brought the case too late. | ||
| But here's the catch-22, Steve. | ||
| I couldn't bring the case prior to that because in October of 2019, I wasn't a candidate when the law was passed, number one. | ||
| And number two, and this isn't Sean Parnell saying this, this isn't our attorney saying this, this is the PA Supreme Court and past PA Supreme Court case law. | ||
| They themselves have held That litigants or candidates cannot challenge the outcome of an election prior to the election being finished. | ||
| We would have no legal standing. | ||
| So the court put me in a catch-22, which means I couldn't challenge before, I couldn't challenge after, and then because they dismissed my case with prejudice, they said that I am the only person, along with Mike Kelly, am not allowed to challenge the constitutionality of Act 77, period, end of story, in Pennsylvania. | ||
| So we brought that case to the Supreme Court and they denied our emergency injunction to debate the constitutional merit of this issue. | ||
| And they also didn't take up the case on the marriage, which is frustrating beyond measure, because you would think that in the United States of America, the Constitution matters. | ||
| The letter of the law matters. | ||
| And Steve, here's what I want your viewers to understand. | ||
| I encourage them to go read the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's response to our lawsuit. | ||
| Steve, they do not debate the constitutionality of Act 77, which is staggering to me. | ||
| But you know what they do do? | ||
| They say, basically, if the Supreme Court gets involved in this case, that it will create chaos. | ||
| What the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania did was basically outline the merits of what they call in the legal world, the heckler's veto. | ||
| And when I read that, I said, wait, you're saying that if we follow the Constitution, it will create chaos and undermine our republic. | ||
| But it was the Commonwealth government of Pennsylvania that created the chaos in the first place. | ||
| And so, look... | ||
| 50% of the people in this state don't trust the election. | ||
| Now, we're not alleging fraud. | ||
| We built a very rigorous constitutional case based on 200 years of PA Supreme Court constitutional case law that supports our position, and we can't seem to get a case in the High Court of Pennsylvania or in the Supreme Court of the United States of America. | ||
| We can't get a case on the merits. | ||
| And so what we're doing moving forward, the next step is The only thing, as I mentioned, the only thing that was denied was our injunctive relief. | ||
| We're going to petition the court on what they call a petition for certiorari, basically asking the Supreme Court in an expedited manner to hear our case and hear it on the merits. | ||
| Because I think that the American people deserve to know that the Constitution matters and that they can have faith in this election. | ||
| And by the way, Steve, this is exactly how our system of government is intended to work. | ||
| You know, the courts should interpret what the law is by the Constitution, and we're asking that the Supreme Court of the United States to hear our case on the merits, because that's what the people deserve. | ||
| Sean, here's the thing. | ||
| When I saw what the Supreme Court, after the District Court, what she said, and then when the Supreme Court didn't want to touch it, when you read it, I said, oh my gosh, they do not want to touch the merits of this. | ||
| In fact, they're kind of arguing Parnell and Kelly's point. | ||
| Right? | ||
| And coming up and saying, hey, you should have done this back in 2019. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes! | |
| I said, man, this is radioactive. | ||
| But here's the point. | ||
| You know, YouTube's just coming out now saying they're going to start taking down every video that's, you know, got Parnell and Bannon and these guys claiming that this thing's illegal, claims it's unconstitutional, claiming there's a mass fraud. | ||
| 50 percent, 47 percent of the American people right now think the fix was in. | ||
| OK? | ||
| 50 percent of the people in Pennsylvania, 53 percent of the people in Georgia. | ||
| And those poll numbers are only going to increase. | ||
| This scar is not going to heal until this is fully vetted at the Supreme Court. | ||
| Do you agree with that? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I do agree with that. | |
| And when you say 50, look, it's a constitutional crisis, Steve. | ||
| You know, we're not asking the, you know, one of the remedies that the court, in court documents, they ask you to put forth potential remedies. | ||
| What we're saying is that if Act 77 is facially unconstitutional, then every mail-in ballot, both Democrat, Independent, and Republican submitted under that would be illegal. | ||
| But what we are not, we are not necessarily asking the court to throw out those ballots. | ||
| We're asking the court to help us find a remedy. | ||
| Here's why I believe that the state of Pennsylvania is in a constitutional crisis the likes of which we really haven't seen before in 184 years. | ||
| Because, look, if you throw out 2.5 million no-excuse absentee ballots, yes, of course that's explosive. | ||
| But if the court prescribes a remedy, which, by the way, they can prescribe any remedy that they want in this case to help provide clarity, that's what we're asking them to do. | ||
| But so if the court simply says, yeah, 2020 was messed up, Act 77 was indeed constitutional, and they kick it back to the legislature and they say, you know, fix this problem. | ||
| Well, you're going to have 50% of the people in the state of Pennsylvania saying, wait a second, the 2020 election was unconstitutional and illegal? | ||
| That doesn't bode well in the faith for our elections either, you know. | ||
| So, look, this is a constitutional crisis. | ||
| This is why we have courts to help us interpret the law and give us faith in the system. | ||
| And we're asking the Supreme Court to do just that. | ||
| Sean, can we ask you just to stay over a few minutes? | ||
| We've got a two-minute commercial break, and we'll be right back. | ||
| Sean Parnell ran for Congress, still actively engaged and trying to get sorted out, because I've got to tell you, if he wins in court, he'll be the next congressman beating Conor Lamb. | ||
| We're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| We're going to return with Sean Parnell, Raheem Kassam, Bernie Kerik, Darren Beatty from Revolver News, all next in the War Room. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room Pandemic with Stephen K. Bannon. | |
| The epidemic is a demon and we cannot let this demon hide. | ||
| War Room Pandemic. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Courage is contagious, and my guest has courage in spades. | ||
| Sean Parnell, why are you doing this? | ||
| You can't be making many friends up in the Commonwealth. | ||
| Right now, it looks like you're just rocking the boat. | ||
| Everybody wants us just to go away and not look at what went on. | ||
| So why are you doing this? | ||
|
unidentified
|
You know what, Steve, I don't care about Republican or Democrat, and I said this on the campaign trail all the time. | |
| I'm not looking to find the Democrat solution or the Republican solution to the problems that we face today. | ||
| Part of the job of being a servant leader is always representing the people and doing what's right on behalf of them. | ||
| I took an oath. | ||
| to defend the Constitution of the United States. | ||
| And when you get out of the military, that does not, that oath does not expire. | ||
| It's lifelong. | ||
| And I'm going to do everything I can until my dying breath to defend the Constitution of this country, both the PA Constitution and the federal Constitution. | ||
| And this, in this lawsuit, you know, I mean, I'm suing the General Assembly, which is controlled by Republicans, and I'm suing the governor, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, which is, which are Democrats. | ||
| The bottom line is, The Constitution protects us all from government overreach. | ||
| It shields us all from government abuses, and that is what I took a note to, and that's what I'm fighting for. | ||
| And so, you know, I'm going to continue to fight on the behalf of the people, and we're going to make sure that we get this petition for certiorari submitted. | ||
| And we're going to do—we're going to fight like crazy and hope and pray that the Supreme Court takes the case on the merits, because I believe that they have a responsibility to assure that the American public that elections were conducted in accordance with the Constitution. | ||
| I know you're not a lawyer, but what are your thoughts on this Texas lawsuit that calls out Pennsylvania specifically? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, look, I think we need to follow every legal avenue possible to make sure that people have clarity on this election. | |
| And here's, I think, the important point in this Texas lawsuit. | ||
| States like Pennsylvania changed the rules of the game after the fact. | ||
| So not only was Act 77 passed unconstitutionally, the Secretary of State in Pennsylvania and the Governor in Pennsylvania and the Attorney General in Pennsylvania manipulated that law by removing postmark requirements, by removing any semblance of a deadline, by removing the signature verification requirements. | ||
| What they did effectively was destroy, water down and destroy ballot integrity. | ||
| And so, you know, you can't change the rules of the game after the fact. | ||
| It's not fair to the people who are playing the game. | ||
| And that's why I think it's important that this Texas lawsuit, and that my lawsuit, see the light of day in the Supreme Court. | ||
| Because again, this is exactly how our system of government is intended to work. | ||
| The Supreme Court should take both of these cases up on the merits, hear them out, and provide a level of clarity on these issues. | ||
| Because this is about the people and not about politics. | ||
| Sean, how do people get access to you during the day? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I'm on Twitter at Sean Parnell USA, and on Parler under the same name, Sean Parnell USA. | |
| You can find me on Facebook. | ||
| I'm also on Instagram. | ||
| And help me out in this fight. | ||
| You know, I'm funding, doing everything I can to fund this legal fight. | ||
| I've got an election defense fund at SeanForCongress.co. | ||
| If you feel compelled to donate, please do so. | ||
| Because defending the Constitution is something that is important to us all. | ||
| I want everybody in our posse, everybody in the livestream, everybody in the hashtag War and Pandemic to focus on that. | ||
| Focus on Sean Parnell and Mike Kelly. | ||
| Sean, thank you very much. | ||
| Honored to have you on. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thanks, Steve. | |
| Thanks. | ||
| An honor to be here. | ||
| That's an American patriot right there, folks. | ||
| Okay, Raheem Kassam. | ||
| Raheem, you've seen the First Hour Show. | ||
| I'm bringing my co-host, Raheem Kassam. | ||
| Raheem, I really want your thoughts, because I think you're one of the best guys out there in thinking through social media, how it interacts with information, and how people actually come to an understanding of what the real world is today. | ||
| Talk to us about YouTube. | ||
| Yes Steve, well just before we went to air today, just before 10am, YouTube published its new guidelines that they've been putting together, it looks like for quite some time. | ||
| They're announcing effectively that they will be disallowing content, that is to say, actively pursuing and removing content that alleges widespread fraud or errors that led to the outcome of the presidential election. | ||
| Specifically, they have said in some cases they have allowed some controversial views, but since yesterday was the safe harbour deadline, and as we know, That is almost an arbitrary deadline in the sense that it isn't in the Constitution. | ||
| The only constitutional deadline is January the 20th. | ||
| But since yesterday, they say, was the safe harbor deadline for the U.S. | ||
| presidential election, and enough states have certified their election results, they will start removing any piece of content uploaded today or any time after. | ||
| So that's not they're not going to go back apparently they say from today or any time after that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors change the outcome of the 2020 US presidential election. | ||
| They say that they will remove videos that claim a certain presidential candidate won due to widespread either software glitches or counting errors And they also say, which is quite ominous, that they will ramp up the policy in the weeks to come. | ||
| Now, Steve, that was also, and I imagine you've got questions on that, but that's also part of a wider release that goes into some of the new fact-checking things that they're introducing to YouTube as well. | ||
| So even if you make it past their ban hammer, Uh, it looks like you're going to get a big stinking, uh, um, you know, kind of a shield like Twitter does over, over your post to say, uh, this ain't true. | ||
| Right now, you know, Sean Pound now says it's 50-50 in Pennsylvania. | ||
| It's 53% of the people in Georgia, according to Trafalgar's crosstabs, that you and Posobug were the smart enough guys to find, think that something went on here, that it wasn't free and fair. | ||
| You're seeing even in the polling, it's 53-47 in the Quinnipiac and all the general polls. | ||
| Right? | ||
| The buried leads and all these polls when he drilled down on it. | ||
| It's, you know, anywhere from 43 to 47, 48 percent of the American people overall, then we look at the states, think something's up. | ||
| Right? | ||
| That's not because of fake news. | ||
| That's because they're seeing what's out there and these are still in the courts. | ||
| We've got about a minute, Rahim. | ||
| I've got to hold you over. | ||
| But in 30 seconds, how can these things still be actively at the Supreme Court, in the state courts, in the state legislatures, and YouTube do this? | ||
| Because YouTube thinks it is the cause. | ||
| Big tech thinks they do make the decisions. | ||
| And America is fashioned to their purpose and in their image. | ||
| And that's what we're going to have to fight against. | ||
| In the ad break that's coming up, I'll finish work on something that I'm launching in the next couple of minutes. | ||
| It's going to be stopthesensors.com. | ||
| It's not quite up, but it's going to be up in time for the next hour. | ||
| Okay, we're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| We're in return. | ||
| We've got Raheem Kassam, Bernie Kerik, Jack Maxey on the hard drive from hell. | ||
| Jack's returning, that's correct. | ||
| We've also got Darren Badia. | ||
| Explosive new story up on the revolver.news about the CCP's influence peddling here in the United States of America. | ||
| And of course we have somebody from the whistleblower movement later in the show to talk about the Chinese Communist Party's infiltration of the elites of the United States of America. |
Export Selection