Dec. 31, 2020 - Bannon's War Room
47:56
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. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Pandemic. | |
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| The President of the United States returns to the nation's capital today in the middle of a constitutional crisis and what is hurtling towards a national security crisis. | ||
| We've already got the pandemic and now we've got a constitutional crisis and quite frankly with Joe Biden's compromise by the Chinese Communist Party very quickly hurtling in towards to a national security crisis. | ||
| You're in the war room. | ||
| It is Wednesday the 31st of December, the year of our Lord, 2020. | ||
| Last show of one of the most historic years in American history. | ||
| Rudy Giuliani, the man of the year for the War Room, in the opening segment of this said he thought it was the toughest year, hardest year for America in his lifetime and that is America's mayor during 9-11. | ||
| John Fretich, I want to thank the guys at John Fretich for helping to produce the show today. | ||
| Particularly Real America's Voice, the team out in Denver. | ||
| Heroic efforts to make sure the show is up every day during the holidays. | ||
| We don't take days off here. | ||
| And we particularly don't take days off when we're in the middle of a war. | ||
| Which we are. | ||
| And I want to thank GTV and Gnews who work 24-7 to get this out in Mandarin to the diaspora. | ||
| This is the most powerful show on the globe. | ||
| We have a global audience. | ||
| People have checked in today from all over the world. | ||
| I want to thank you. | ||
| And the reason is that we try to work our tails off to make sure we provide you great information. | ||
| I want to bring one of the runners up. | ||
| And the runners up we've got, I want to make sure we have Rudy Giuliani as man of the year of the war room. | ||
| The runners up are Dr. Steven Hadfield, the great bio, I don't want to call him a bioweapons guy, just a guy who knows pandemics. | ||
| Formerly maybe a bioweapons guy. | ||
| Defense, defense guy. | ||
| Dr. Peter Navarro, Congressman now Burgess Owens, used to be a former football great, who's going to be one of the leaders of this movement. | ||
| Steve Cortez, the greatest spokesman for the Trump movement. | ||
| And, of course, our own Bill McGinley from Holtzman Vogel. | ||
| So we probably ruined Bill McGinley's career by doing this, but we just had to do it. | ||
| And the reason, Bill, before we get to what your current thinking is about this constitutional crisis and where we go from here, I've just got to say, and I got this from so many people in July and August and September when you and Rahim were all over this transition project, actually calling what was going to happen. | ||
| I gave that lecture series with Rahim based upon your thinking. | ||
| But on election night, when we did the 8-hour or 10-hour special with Barris and yourself, no happy talk, no spin, you were talking about the legality and really calling every shot that was going to happen. | ||
| And Barris was talking about the polling and about the reality of the numbers. | ||
| It really took this show, that's when the show went to the next level. | ||
| And I want to thank you. | ||
| So Bill and Rahim, I want to go back. | ||
| You were the two guys that warned America about this, particularly warned the Trump movement that this thing called the Transition Integrity Project was a fully-baked, thought-through plan of how they were not going to, they didn't care what the vote was. | ||
| There was no chance they were going to lose. | ||
| So Bill, give us your perspective. | ||
| And Rahim, I want you to jump in here since you two guys are the guys that did it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, I think first of all I need to give a lot of credit to Rahim because he was all over this from the very beginning and really highlighted what they were trying to do both in terms of communications and prepping the public for all of the stuff that the Democrats were going to do. | |
| when you understand how this process works in a lot of the different actors uh... that are in the political ecosystem it was clear that the transition integrity project was kind of the big reveal of the bolt by your planning process that they have been going through uh... credit to regain for really putting a fine point on it drawing attention to it uh... so that the public to be educated about what was actually going on yet and bill i mean you you you laid out there | ||
| This was a gaslighting campaign. | ||
| It was a psychological warfare campaign to kind of tell people, hey, no matter how Trump wins, and that was their thing, right? | ||
| How Trump wins on the night or whatever, hey, you're going to have to go back and look back or wait and not concede and wait for more of these mail-in ballots to keep coming in and all of that. | ||
| That was what these guys were there to do. | ||
| And I remember blowing your phone up, Bill. | ||
| Uh, texting you non-stop saying, hey, hey, hey, look, is this real? | ||
| Can you read this for me? | ||
| Because, you know, I'm not, I'm not as well-versed in the law, I'm not as well-versed in a lot of the Constitution as somebody like Bill McGinley is, but it all seemed to be incredibly sketchy, and the more layers we peeled back from it, Nils Gilman, the Berggruen Institutes... | ||
| All of this, it all kind of came together and it all dovetailed and it was this kind of just extraordinarily widely put together psychological conspiracy. | ||
| I want to ask you guys a question. | ||
| By the way, for all the people that are new audience members, Bill McGinley was in the first two years of the Trump administration. | ||
| He was Cabinet Secretary, one of the backbones of really not just the White House Counsel's Office, but in really pulling together everything in those first couple of years and a strong MAGA Guy, given where you guys start talking about this in July and August, given it's the last day of 2020, I want to ask Bill, start with you and then Rahim, do you think, are we where you thought we would be given what your knowledge of this situation is? | ||
| Or do you think Trump would have conceded by now? | ||
| Or what, Bill? | ||
| I wanted your perspective and then Rahim's. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Anybody who's worked with the President understands that he's a fighter and he's never going to give up. | |
| So, given where we are today, it's not surprising to me. | ||
| I think that the good work that Rahim did in highlighting the transition integrity project has really empowered your listeners to understand what the mainstream media and also the Democrats are doing in trying to shut down the debate about what happened in this election and also with respect to the rules of the electoral college. | ||
| One of the things that makes your audience so powerful is that they're willing to actually get into the substance and start to be engaged and to activate themselves to be force multipliers out there in their communities to educate people. | ||
| That's an extremely powerful segment of the population for the people who are tuning into this show, whether they're Republicans or Democrats. | ||
| And so I think the continued posture of the show to educate people about what's really happening as opposed to the spin that's going on in trying to shut down the debate and trying to force people to turn away from all of the procedural safeguards that are both in the election process through the courts and other venues, but also for the electoral colleges that works its way through this constitutional and statutory process is extremely important. | ||
| Hats off to you guys for doing it. | ||
| Look, I think Bill and others deserve far more credit than I do. | ||
| I'm just the guy that sits there and asks the questions, right? | ||
| I mean, Natalie Winters did some amazing reporting on this stuff, going through all of these people and who they are and how they're all connected. | ||
| And Bill, I think you really helped the world understand the detail behind this and how this all works. | ||
| Steve, your question was, are we where we thought we'd be? | ||
| Yeah, look, we are in the worst-case scenario in my head. | ||
| I'd factored in, hey, what if we don't pay enough attention to what they say they're going to do in that 30-page report that the Transition Integrity Project put out? | ||
| And I don't think that we paid enough mind to it in advance of the election. | ||
| Do you think it's the worst? | ||
| Because Trump is not only not conceded, he's never going to stand on... The only stage of inauguration he's going to stand on is if he's given the speech. | ||
| Yeah, but in a technical sense. | ||
| You know, this is a backfoot situation in a technical sense. | ||
| And that's okay, I don't mind that. | ||
| We're born to fight in that regard. | ||
| This is why everybody, by the way, on social media who's saying, give up, there's no chance, January 6th, doesn't matter. | ||
| They are defrauding you. | ||
| They are defrauding the Constitution. | ||
| They are defrauding your birthright. | ||
| If you look at a lot of that, a lot of it's younger voices in this, and look, we try to be mentors to younger voices. | ||
| Remember all those studies from World War II they did afterwards about the torpedoing of the Wolf Packs, torpedoing of Merchant Marine, of the British Navy and the American Navy? | ||
| Remember, the studies came back, it was the younger, healthier, stronger ones that died. | ||
| You know why? | ||
| They gave up. | ||
| It was the experience of the old codgers who were out of shape, not exactly Johnny Weissmuller as far as a swimmer goes, who hung on because they understood, I've been through bad stuff before. | ||
| I can hang on. | ||
| I can make this. | ||
| It was the young strong who just kind of gave up because it's like so overwhelming. | ||
| That's one of the situations I've seen today. | ||
| Bill, we want to hold you over for the next segment too, but I've got to ask you this question about going forward. | ||
| Rudy Giuliani We talked about in his segments on here that we're in a constitutional crisis and hurtling towards a bigger constitutional crisis. | ||
| You're our guy on this and you were very close to the president in the first couple years of the administration. | ||
| Do you agree with that? | ||
| Do you think we're hurtling towards a constitutional crisis in this process over the next days and weeks ahead? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No, look, I think the process is going to play out. | |
| Senator Hawley has said that he's going to join the conservative House Republicans in objecting to the electoral slates from specific states. | ||
| uh... both the constitution federal law lays out that process it's going to unfold that we're going to see where it goes uh... in terms of the posture i think what we're seeing is this similar to what uh... general mccall said at the battle of the bold when the germans demanded submit a surrender uh... is one word response was not uh... you just don't give up you fight on uh... and i think that's exactly what the president's going to do uh... and his team but we can talk about some of the stuff in the next segment | ||
| uh... about what could unfold on january six well let's start let's start with their now because if you look at our tv and i think they're they're they're combining the electoral law of eighteen seventy six with this theory about being hardwired into the constitution First off, where do you stand with all that? | ||
| I know we got the electoral law of 1876 or 1882, whatever it was, about the 1876 election. | ||
| That's never actually been taken up to the Supreme Court to be argued, is that really constitutional? | ||
| Right. | ||
| Where do you think we stand with this? | ||
| Is it the electoral law that we're following, or is it more directly from the Constitution? | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's both. | |
| So the authorities that kind of govern the process for tallying, authenticating, and certifying the votes of the Electoral College come from the U.S. | ||
| Constitution, Article II, Section 1. | ||
| They also come from the Twelfth Amendment, and of course, what you just referenced, Steve, is the Electoral Count Act. | ||
| of eighteen eighty seven uh... plus there's some congressional uh... practice and precedent which when you have a legislative body that's not a court of law uh... a lot of that does come into play yet so one of the things that we're going to start seeing in these these are typically mechanical processes that don't receive a lot of attention uh... because they're kind of pro forma And like I said, very mechanical. | ||
| But on January 3rd, we're going to have a new Congress that is sworn in. | ||
| And that's going to be the Congress that actually takes up Uh, the certification and counting of the electoral votes from the 50 states plus the District of Columbia. | ||
| One of the things that's going to happen shortly after those members are sworn in is that the Archivist of the United States is going to transmit to Congress all of the certificates of ascertainment and certificates of the vote from the states and the District of Columbia that are going to be used during the joint session. | ||
| Now, there were some instances where some independent slates of electors for the president Um, basically have met and tried to send documents. | ||
| I think they've got a pretty high legal hurdle to get those admitted or accepted before the joint session. | ||
| But we're going to see what happens. | ||
| In terms of the precedence, that's 1887. | ||
| We've had two instances where objections have been made that were in order. | ||
| And in order for an objection during the joint session to be in order, it has to be supported or signed by a member of the House. | ||
| And one senator. | ||
| It has to be in writing and in clear and concise terms has to state the basis for the objection. | ||
| The first one was in 1969. | ||
| This was the instance of a faithless elector who was supposed to cast his vote for both Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew. | ||
| Instead, he cast it for George Wallace and his running mate. | ||
| That vote was objected to. | ||
| The second time was in 2005. | ||
| This was after George W. Bush's re-election. | ||
| This was regarding the votes, the electoral votes from the state of Ohio. | ||
| And if you remember, that was when then the late Representative Stephanie Tubbs from Ohio objected and was joined by the then Senator Barbara Boxer of California. | ||
| That objection was upheld and it was the joint session recessed so that the House and the Senate could independently debate that objection. | ||
| It failed in both chambers and the joint session was resumed and they just went on to count the Ohio votes plus those of the remaining eight. | ||
| So those are the two points. | ||
| Bill, Bill Hanger. | ||
| We're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| We're going to turn with Bill McGinley, Holtzman Vogel, former Cabinet Secretary, when we return to go through the constitutional issues that lie ahead over the next days and weeks. | ||
| Be back in a moment. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
| 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. Bannon. | ||
| Our guest is Bill McGinley. | ||
| We're going through the constitutional crisis that we're in the middle of. | ||
| So Bill, I just wanna make sure for the audience you understand, the Electoral Control Act, this is Hawley and Mo Brooks, and I think you're gonna see hundreds of congressmen jump in here, but that would be two hours of debate. | ||
| That's correct. | ||
| in the house but in the senate totally separately concomitant run run together for each state that they call into question served as the current six days of sleep in mexico up with current six states that would be basically twelve hours of debate correct not two hours for all six it would be twelve hours correct that's correct and and put step back for a second and understand how this is going to unfold on on january six | ||
|
unidentified
|
The first thing we all need to understand is that what we're talking about when there's an objection to a state's electors during the joint session, that is not a contingent election where no candidate has achieved the 270 votes necessary to become president. | |
| This is not a contingent election. | ||
| This is simply the counting of the electoral votes. | ||
| So let's make sure that we distinguish that process from the one we're talking about. | ||
| Number one, Vice President Pence will be the presiding officer as president of the Senate over the proceedings in the well of the House, where both chambers will gather to count the electoral votes. | ||
| These states will be called in alphabetical order. | ||
| So they're going to start with Alabama and work their all the way through. | ||
| And then what they're going to do is they're going to continue to count these states until they are done. | ||
| So if you have objections that are upheld or objections that are in order for six states, that means in addition to the time it takes to count the electoral votes in the states that are not objected to, you're going to add on two hours of debate for each state. | ||
| The House is going to get two hours, the Senate is going to get two hours, and they have to settle those objections before they can move on to the next state. | ||
| So let's say they object to the state of Arizona, which will be one of the first states, if that's one of the states they're going to object to, they need to then recess the joint The House will stay on the wall of the House. | ||
| The Senate will recess to its chamber. | ||
| They will have two hours of debate total. | ||
| Each member is permitted no more than five minutes. | ||
| We don't know yet how they're going to divide the debate, whether it's going to be Republican and Democrat or those who favor the objection versus those who oppose. | ||
| But it's going to be five minutes. | ||
| Now, each member is only supposed to speak once. | ||
| One of the open questions that we're going to have to see is whether some members are going to be able to yield their time to a colleague so that they can make their points. | ||
| Number two, you can't bring in outsiders. | ||
| So it's not going to be a situation where the president's counsel will then be permitted to present arguments on the floor of the Senate or in the well of the House. | ||
| Participation in the debate will be limited to the members of that chamber. | ||
| And they're going to have to be the ones to actually make the arguments for the objection and opposing the objection. | ||
| A couple of the other open questions that we're going to have is going to be the use of exhibits during the debate. | ||
| If the debates are going to be televised live on television, whether it's C-SPAN or others, are the members going to be able to bring exhibits to the floor Um, so that they can basically exponentially, uh, uh, expand the amount of information they can provide to the American people. | ||
| Um, plus inserting documents into the congressional record. | ||
| Um, you know, a lot of times during these debates or committee hearings and others, uh, members only have five minutes, which is a pretty standard length of time for them to present their case. | ||
| Can they supplement those arguments, uh, by introducing documents, um, into the congressional record so that history can go back and look? | ||
| at the evidence either for or against the objections. | ||
| So there's a couple of open questions that I have about how this is going to proceed in the era of 24-hour cable news and social media. | ||
| Bill, real quickly, when you say that each member gets allocated a certain amount of time, if you just do the math on the thing, that's more than two hours. | ||
| Is two hours a cap, or does everybody get a chance to speak? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Two hours is a cap. | |
| And no member can speak for more than five minutes. | ||
| Okay, so then it's going to be obviously selected. | ||
| But at the end of that time, if you go down that path and you have a full debate and the global TV audience sees all the evidence and all the receipts, the vote is still by member. | ||
| In other words, the House votes as the House votes in a normal bill. | ||
| The Senate votes, right? | ||
| And so tell us what's happened there. | ||
| You've got a Senate. | ||
| Let's say the Senate is still controlled by the Republicans and the House by the Democrats. | ||
| Walk through what actually happens to bring this to a head. | ||
| Using the Electoral Control Act. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| In order for a objection to be sustained, it has to pass both chambers. | ||
| So the House has to uphold it and the Senate has to uphold it for those electors' votes not to be counted. | ||
| If it fails in one or both of the chambers, then those votes are going to be counted. | ||
| Given that the Democrats still control the House of Representatives, it's a pretty tall order for any of these electors' slates not to be counted. | ||
| It's also going to be a tall order in the United States Senate, given the number of members who have come out and made statements, say, in opposition to any objections to the electoral votes from the states. | ||
| So in all likelihood, what this is going to be is this is going to be an opportunity for those such as Senator Hawley, and if he's joined by any of his colleagues, plus the House Republicans who are going to sign on to these objections, to forcefully make their case to the American people, both through the use of their speeches, potential exhibits, potential insertions into the congressional record. | ||
| But let's not forget, Steve, a congressional process is not like the court of law, where you're very limited in what you can do under the rules of procedure and the rules of evidence. | ||
| We're not in a court of law, and anybody who has practiced before the Congress understands political theater is an incredibly important component to what happens in the legislative body. | ||
| And as somebody once told me, and I think it still rings true today, you know, everything in Congress is a political process and a political forum. | ||
| If you look back at 2005 and what the Democrats did when they objected to the Ohio votes, Not only were they making their arguments on the floor, but they were holding press conferences with their allies outside of the chamber to try and draw attention to the issues that they thought the American people needed to be made aware of. | ||
| This clearly, with the social media suppression, mainstream media suppression, this completely eviscerates Biden in front of a global audience, because they'll be showing the details. | ||
| I said it would destroy Biden because the showing of the evidence that Rudy and these guys have that Hollywood put forward would be, people would be shocked because remember most Americans, 40% of Democrats haven't even heard about this. | ||
| It would eviscerate, it would eviscerate, you know, having seen the details. | ||
| I want to go, though, to the ability to get to a contingent election. | ||
| Given you still could have special sessions or Pennsylvania could meet on Monday, what is necessary to get to a contingent? | ||
| What is necessary to decertify the Biden slates so you can get to a contingent election where you vote by state party delegation and where the Republicans control this? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think there's two potential avenues for that to happen. | |
| Both of them are extremely high hurdles. | ||
| The first one is that one of the objections, one or more of the objections is actually upheld by the House and the Senate, meaning the electoral votes are not gonna be counted. | ||
| In that case, then we go into kind of uncharted territory where the question becomes, does it still require 270 votes to be declared the president if state's electors are not counted during the joint session? | ||
| There's been a couple of instances where that has happened, where one or more electors have not been, have been objected to or have not been counted. | ||
| These predate the 1887 Electoral Count Act. | ||
| One was in 1873, where Arkansas and Louisiana's electors were not counted. | ||
| Of course, that was the time when President Grant received the requirement for election, but he was going to win whether or not those were counted or not. | ||
| In 1865, only two of the three electors for the state of Nevada were counted. | ||
| Now, if we were to ever enter into a situation where there's an open question, some of the speculation | ||
| In theory, including from the Congressional Research Service, which has a very good summary of the June 6th joint session, posits whether or not there could be some sort of motion made during the joint session to determine what should be the majority required for election as president if slates of electors are not counted as a result of an objection or a competing slate of electors is submitted and the Congress is unable to count them. | ||
| i want to go to that thing and by the way you make it may have to keep you over a few minutes in the next one because we have to get these questions answered the right now the supreme court has been told crickets are taking a nice thing up i believe that they're writing an opinion right now and i think the release of this afternoon or tomorrow that basically says no moss we don't any part of at least these the efforts in pennsylvania all this that you're gonna say cuz they haven't done anything on expedited may would come out and schedule stuff do you do you agree with that | ||
| overall beside the side issues are these and what what do you think they're going to go abil mcginley I'm... | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think they're going to do one of two things. | |
| Either they're going to issue an opinion in DICTA that states what you just described, which is basically signaling their lack of an appetite to get involved in any of these controversies, or number two, they're just going to delay the briefing until after it's moved. | ||
| After the January 6th joint session and the inauguration of January 20th. | ||
| Isn't that too cowardly, even for John Roberts? | ||
| I mean, how do you do that? | ||
| Then you live in, like, you were so gutless. | ||
| Don't you have to come up with an opinion and say, hey, we're not going to take this up, and here's the reason we're not going to take it up? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think that would be the preferred course of action, simply because it lays down a pretty big marker, not only for this election, but future elections, about what the threshold's going to be for them to take it up. | |
| But, you know, there's something called basically the political question doctrine, which is where an issue really should be resolved by the political branches of government, i.e. | ||
| the Congress. | ||
| The Supreme Court is loathe to step into the middle of that because they view their job as, number one, interpreting the Constitution, but number two, applying law to the facts. | ||
| And if they think this is something that's a political question for the legislature, they're going to try and step back and avoid getting involved in that. | ||
| Bill, hang on one second. | ||
| Short commercial break. | ||
| We'll return with Bill McGinley. | ||
| Also, our Woman of the Year, Dr. Li-Ming Yan from Hong Kong University, now in the United States, will join us. | ||
| The Woman of the Year. | ||
| War Room. | ||
| All next. | ||
|
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. | ||
| Jack, you've got a very brilliant insight. | ||
| Share that with us before we get back to McGinnis. | ||
| Well, January 6th is the Feast of the Epiphany. | ||
| This is when Jesus is made manifest to the followers. | ||
| And also what's interesting to me about the definition of epiphany in the Merriam-Webster's Dictionary One, a usually sudden manifestation or perception of the essential nature or meaning of something. | ||
| An illuminating discovery, realization, or disclosure. | ||
| An intuitive grasp of reality through something such as an event. | ||
| Usually simple and striking. | ||
| So while you think about your oaths to the Constitution, you're going to be making a big decision on January 6th, the Feast of the Epiphany. | ||
| Let's make the right one, people. | ||
| Kronos versus Kairos? | ||
| Kronos versus Kairos. | ||
| Let's get back to Bill McGinley, who's been nice enough to stay over. | ||
| The ones that must go to the Supreme Court and have some decision, though, Brother McGinley, is Is the Electoral Control Act in charge here, or is Louie Gohmert's suit that says, hey, the Vice President of the United States is hardwired into the Constitution. | ||
| The Act doesn't interest me. | ||
| I don't want to do it. | ||
| It's Mike Pence is the guiding thing. | ||
| He's hardwired directly into the Constitution, as the founder said it, the Electoral Control Act. | ||
| Basically what Louie's saying, I think in so many words, it's unconstitutional and will not stand up to scrutiny. | ||
| Do you agree with that? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm not sure I agree with that because the Constitution, obviously, under the Supremacy Clause, is basically going to be the greatest authority governing our conduct in the government. | |
| The question then for the Court is going to be whether the 1887 Electoral Count Act then exceeded the Constitution, the boundaries set by the Constitution. | ||
| I think the Court, given the amount of reliance on the Electoral Count Act, uh... sentence passage is going to be reluctant to overturn it i think one of the questions that we need to watch though uh... is on january third when the new congress is cut comes into into uh... | ||
| in the fashion uh... you know they're immediately not only going to have to elect the officers uh... such a speaker of the house and president pro tem of the senate uh... but they're also going to have to adopt their rules packages uh... that's going to govern their conduct now the electoral uh... copy electoral count act is going to set forth the procedure uh... on january six in terms of the joint fashion uh... but i do think that there is probably some play uh... in those rules uh... when the chambers decide to go if they end up going | ||
| it recessing a going a separate ways uh... to actually debate uh... these objections and the question's going to be whether there's any rules changes in either chamber uh... to try and uh... | ||
| okay so help help out already have any option one of the reason one of the reason the president is coming back in terms of bangin heads about these uh... but about the vetoes on the nda and all the stuff on coven get people two thousand dollars all that The other thing is that people understand Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell are working 24-7. | ||
| Mitch McConnell doesn't want this vote. | ||
| He does not want this to happen. | ||
| He's been on the conference calls about this. | ||
| Nancy Pelosi certainly doesn't want 12 hours of evidence rubbed the world's nose in it. | ||
| So these guys are plotting and planning. | ||
| Real quickly, Bill, what do you think they're doing up there right now to try to chop block the President's supporters that really want to get this all out in front of the American people? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, they're not going to be able to change the statute, and that's where the two hours total and five minute limitation per member comes from. | |
| What they may be able to do is try and restrict what members can do during that five minutes to limit them to one each. | ||
| They can't yield to members. | ||
| Uh, maybe they can't. | ||
| Maybe they're going to try and increase the threshold for placing documents into the congressional record. | ||
| Ways to try and limit the amount of evidence that makes its way to the American public through the record of the official proceedings. | ||
| And that's why I called attention to the fact that in 2005, when the Democrats objected to Ohio's electoral votes, if you go back and look at what they actually did, there was not much happening on the floor other than the debate, but what they were doing was trying to hold press conferences to try and highlight the issues that they were concerned about. | ||
| And so not only is this a war proceeding issue, it's also something that's going to be surrounding those war proceedings, where people are going to try and draw attention to the issues that they care about. | ||
| Bill McGinley, how do people get you on social media? | ||
|
unidentified
|
So you can follow me on Twitter at WJMcGinley. | |
| That's W-J-M-C-G-I-N-L-E-Y. | ||
| Bill McGinley, thank you very much for joining us on the last show of Historic Year in American History. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thanks for having me. | |
| Happy New Year. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We're going to have Bill... | |
| Okay, brother. | ||
| We're going to have McGinley on much more because we are hurtling towards a constitutional crisis and we're going to need Rahim and McGinley and Jack Maxey to help us think through this. | ||
| Okay, we're pressed for time here. | ||
| We want to announce the War Room Pandemic Woman of the Year. | ||
| It has to be the defector from Hong Kong, Dr. Li Ming Yan, who is just a hero to the entire world and has become beloved by the American people. | ||
| Dr. Yan, do we have Dr. Yan on yet? | ||
| Okay, we're still working that? | ||
| Okay, fine. | ||
| Thanks. | ||
| Good production. | ||
|
unidentified
|
But our runners-up... Well, it wouldn't be the end of the year without a production flop. | |
| By the way, the guys in Denver are working incredible under very difficult circumstances. | ||
| Our runners-up are glorious ACB, Amy Comey Barrett. | ||
| Also, one of my personal favorites, Kimberly Klasek, who ran for Cummings District in Baltimore. | ||
| One of the many reasons I love her, besides the spirited campaign. | ||
| That would be Kimberly Guilford on the screen. | ||
| Yeah, and Kimberly Guilford. | ||
| I think I changed it, so Kimberly Guilfoyle, Kimberly Klesik right here. | ||
| Here's why I love Klesik. | ||
| Because she ran a spirited race, a tough race, she lost by 50 points, and she has not conceded. | ||
| She is pure MAGA. | ||
| She is a fighter. | ||
| She's a fighter and really been putting forward, and if you watch her campaign closely, she put forward one of the best arguments for the MAGA agenda in inner-city Baltimore. | ||
| And I think it was Cummings Old District, right? | ||
| My mom's from Baltimore, and it's a town before the Colts left. | ||
| It used to be my team. | ||
| So I love Baltimore. | ||
| She's a fighter. | ||
| Guilfoyle, she wins alone on her convention speech, right? | ||
| People thought it was over the top. | ||
| President loved it. | ||
| We loved it. | ||
| Couldn't get enough of it. | ||
| We've got Dr. Yan now. | ||
| Dr. Li Min Yan from Hong Kong University. | ||
| Dr. Yan, your consensus choice, like Rudy was, your consensus choice For the War Room Woman of the Year. | ||
| So now that we know, this is going to basically confirm you're going to get no corporate sponsorships going forward. | ||
| So we just, listen, here's the thing. | ||
| I want to talk about where you were a year ago today in this process of actually finding and getting to the bottom, starting your journey on getting to the bottom of what this SARS-like virus was. | ||
| Tell us what you did a year ago today to really get engaged in this process. | ||
| Okay, so first I want to appreciate that War Room gave me such honor. | ||
| Thank you, sir. | ||
| Thank everyone. | ||
| And last year, last December 31st, I was working in my lab, as usual, because most of times we don't have rest. | ||
| We have a lot of work to do, and we like to work on research. | ||
| And my supervisor, Leo Peng, because that morning, I mean, Beijing time, people in the medical and also the related the science field got the message from Dr. | ||
| Wen Liangli in Wuhan through WeChat that they know that there was a new virus or new disease come out in Wuhan and also China government immediately put the statement that we have noticed some pneumonia, but that doesn't matter and it doesn't transmit between human to human. | ||
| So my supervisor, Prof. Liu Po, as a consultant in WHO emerging emerging disease, he asked me to go to his office and talk to me face to face that could you do some investigation about this unknown disease in Wuhan, because he knows I work from China. I have a specific big network in mainland China that involves doctors, government, and labs. | ||
| And also I asked him, I said, why do you need me to do that? | ||
| He said, because the Hong Kong government and also the WHO scientists cannot gather information from the mainland government. | ||
| And also we are not allowed to go to ask these things. So I hope you to do it in secret. We need this information. So I can't use my network. | ||
| Yeah, Dr. Young, let me ask you, you've exposed, you were the first one, the whistleblower, that exposed this starting in early January, mid-January, you went on Luda's show anonymously, then you came forward, then you came to the West. | ||
| In the time we've got left, we've got about three or four minutes, given that's the end of the year, and this is basically a year ago that you got involved, Are you shocked by how the West is handled? | ||
| Because right now we're still three blind mice. | ||
| I mean, no institution has really challenged, medical institution I think, has challenged the CCP's version of this. | ||
| And what message would you have to the scientific community of the West about what they must do? | ||
| So first, I was shocked from the beginning because first, we know after SARS and China government, although they can lie, but we didn't expect they lie like crazy like now. | ||
| And the second thing I was shocked is how serious this disease is. | ||
| High contagious, more than everyone knows before. | ||
| And also doctors, patients die without any protection and no proper treatment, no other warnings. | ||
| And also the third thing is the scientific world, including the top journal, top scientists, and all the famous people, they work together to spread their lies and also suppress the real truth. | ||
| They know that. | ||
| They know that is a fact. | ||
| It is COVID-19 virus come from China, come from the lab under the Chinese Communist Party government. | ||
| They even know that from intelligence, this is not released by accident. This is on purpose. But they all go around the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| And what else I was surprised is I feel the US people wake up faster than I thought. | ||
| Although the procedure may be still, we are pushing forward to let more people understand it. | ||
| But from July to now, I do see more and more people wake up. | ||
| They understand what happened and they are asking to hold the Chinese Communist Party accountable. | ||
| Dr. Yan, we've got about a minute. | ||
| I want to say, you warned us back, and I think it was in May and June, you said, hey, when you guys come close, first of all, China will never develop a vaccine, they haven't in 5,000 years, right? | ||
| Number two, when the West gets close to some vaccine they've thrown together, The CCP, other strains of this will start coming forward immediately. | ||
| And look, there's no conspiracy, no coincidence. | ||
| This happened over the last week or two. | ||
| What would be your warning to the West right now about going forward with this virus as we see it? | ||
| What would be your warning to the folks in the West? | ||
| I just want the West people to know that we Chinese people really understand the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| We understand communism. | ||
| Very well. | ||
| We know how terrible it is, how cruel it is. | ||
| And don't expect the Chinese Communist Party will be your friend or overcome the virus with you. | ||
| They are using COVID-19 virus and more other virus as a bioweapon. | ||
| And also, without taking this regime down, you cannot solve this problem because there are always new pathogens. | ||
| And if you let them win this time, they will use this way to rule you in the future. | ||
| Dr. Yan, how do people follow you on social media? | ||
| Already our chat is blowing up with people that admire you and love you. | ||
| How do people get more access to you on social media? | ||
| So first, I'm on the Twitter, and before they block me, I'm at Dr. Limon Yeh, class number one. | ||
| And also, you can see there are over 70,000 people following me. | ||
| That's a real one, not a fake one. | ||
| Also, I'm on Parler, I'm on Gap. | ||
| Dr. Li Min Yang, our Woman of the Year, thank you very much. | ||
| Honored to have you on the show, honored to actually know you and be part of all this, so thank you very much. | ||
| Thank you, sir. | ||
| Happy New Year. | ||
| Happy New Year. | ||
| That is a hero. | ||
| Okay, we're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| We're going to have our exit song, which we're not going to play at the end of the show. | ||
| We've got a very special ending, but Take Down the CCP. | ||
| What did Dr. Yan say? | ||
| You either stand up today and start to confront this, or it's going to be over. | ||
| We'll return in a moment with the team. | ||
|
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. | ||
| Live from the nation's capital, Rahim, jump in here. | ||
| I want to make sure that everybody... Look, I don't think New Year's resolutions tend to work, but I tend to have a short-term one, which is dry January, of course. | ||
| I lose about 10-15 pounds in January. | ||
| But I want the audience to adopt their own tiny resolution which will stick, I hope, which is making sure you share this show. | ||
| Especially with somebody that you know on the political left. | ||
| Say to them, hey, look, you listen to one, listen to two episodes, tell us what you think. | ||
| If you don't ever want to come back to it, don't come back to it. | ||
| I guarantee you'll get them hooked. | ||
| So my hope is that people will adopt the New Year's resolution of one-on-one approaching a friend, a family member, a colleague and saying, hey, have you listened to this? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Check it out. | |
| And this is how you get, and listen, the power of this show is the activism. | ||
| It's people engaging. | ||
| We're going to get back to it over the weekend and talking about everything from Arizona to Georgia. | ||
| Things are on fire right now. | ||
| Pennsylvania comes back in on, the session starts on Monday. | ||
| So this is going to be an intense, intense time. | ||
| 2021 is going to be every bit as, I think, crazy as 2020. | ||
| We're in the middle of a fourth turning. | ||
| Right? | ||
| And this is the whirlwind. | ||
| And look, we've sown the wind, and now we reap the whirlwind. | ||
| And so, for you patriots out there, on a global basis, this is the very early stage of this fight. | ||
| Trust me. | ||
| This is going to go on, and it's going to be who's got resolve, who's got grit, and who's got determination. | ||
| Jack Maxey. | ||
| Well, I go back to what I said the day before, or just before, about the Day of the Epiphany, right? | ||
| That's the 12th day of Christmas, and I want my true love to give to me four more years of Donald Trump, defeat the CCP, let freedom ring from every single steeple on planet Earth. | ||
| Rahim, talk to us about what McGinley talked about, about what's going to be for it in the days ahead, because this is going to be one of the most historic weeks, I think, in the American experience. | ||
| Yeah, what's really interesting is this kind of nuanced point about the Election Clause Act, and whether or not that is constitutional or not. | ||
| Now, you know, obviously, Congressman Gohmert, Judge Gohmert, has his ideas on it. | ||
| I had Ted Noel on who wrote that article in the American Thinker yesterday, and he was sort of convinced that, hey, you know, this is unconstitutional and whatever, but The fact is... The Election Control Act, he's convinced it's unconstitutional. | ||
| The Election Control Act, yeah. | ||
| John Yoo thinks the same thing, right? | ||
| Yeah, but the thing is it's still on the statute books and it's not been challenged at that point. | ||
| So my attitude towards this is you have to cover all of your bases. | ||
| So if you cover the base of that and you have the senators and the congressmen who are willing to object and willing to put their points forward, then that covers you in that regard. | ||
| But I, again, I'll stress this and I cannot stress this enough. | ||
| The public needs to speak to Vice President Pence about this. | ||
| On the phone lines, on the social media, on his pages, on his email address, everything. | ||
| You have to make sure the Vice President not only understands the mood of the nation, but understands his constitutional duty in this regard. | ||
| Because there are plenty of people out there telling him Don't do it. | ||
| Don't touch it. | ||
| You're the first one to report that. | ||
| I want to get up, if we can, for the guys in Denver, if we can get up Matt Gaetz. | ||
| I want to make a special comment here. | ||
| We had earlier in the week, or I guess it was last week, we had the great picture of Raheem Kassam getting engaged at the White House. | ||
| It was without a mask on, by the way, I might note. | ||
| But that was a historic photo. | ||
| Last night, I think in Mar-a-Lago, Brother Matt Gaetz has been a co-host of the show. | ||
| The Winter White House. | ||
| The Winter White House. | ||
| It's Palmer Luckey's Sister, Ginger Lucky, who's been, she's sat here a couple times when Matt has been a co-host. | ||
| Do we have the picture of that, if we can pull it up on Denver? | ||
| We don't have? | ||
| Okay, we do. | ||
| Love is in the air, though, here in the War Room. | ||
| We've lost Ricky. | ||
| We've lost Matt. | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| Two mighty oaks have fallen. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Now we've just got to get you two engaged and it'll all be done. | |
| over three percent i don't know if you're we're good here you'll always have a job i think i could Exactly. | ||
| So we've got very special out music today. | ||
| We're not going to end with the CCP. | ||
| We're going to end with a very special rendition, if we can get the Matt Gaetz thing listed up. | ||
| This is not Raheem's first choice on how we end. | ||
| It's been a great year, great journey, a pilgrimage, actually, with this audience. | ||
| And remember, we're at the very, very, very beginning stages of this. | ||
| As I've said for a while, this is going to take 10 or 20 years to work through, right? | ||
| There's going to be many of us here that are going to pass the baton on to others. | ||
| And for everybody that's a boomer out there, remember, this is a chance to save the reputation and history of your generation. | ||
| That's why I'm so enthusiastic every day and going into the Going into the live stream and going into hashtag War and Pandemic, so many people who have never been engaged in politics, have never had an interest in politics, have never really had an interest in history, have just kind of lived these small lives, now understand what's at stake here. | ||
| So Jack Rahim, closing words for 2020? | ||
| Well, many blessings for all of us out there. | ||
| To our audience who stuck with us, we really love you. | ||
| We appreciate your insight. | ||
| Many of you have sent us information that has kept us on top of our game. | ||
| And also, just don't give up. | ||
| Listen, life is a dangerous business and we gotta keep fighting. | ||
| And if you don't fight, you will always lose and it doesn't matter what the contest is. | ||
| So just stay in the fight and hold the line. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think this year has taught us what's important. | |
| We are even more incredibly focused on, you know, the blessings that have been passed on to us by previous generations that fought for so much. | ||
| And we've been, you know, cooped up with our families and our closest loved ones. | ||
| And I think we found that actually the outside world, full of materialism and outside distractions, actually offers less than what we have in front of us. | ||
| I want to say a great big thank you to the audience. | ||
| You know, the National Pulse launched in January as well of this year and we're already at 10 million Amazing. | ||
| We have our top 10 stories going up of the year later on on the site, and it's just incredible to go through it and see it, so thank you all. | ||
| Look, to the Real America's Voice production team and the leadership over there, John Frederick's Radio Network, everybody in the engine room of the War Room want to give you a big thank you for 2020. | ||
| Could not have done it With all the people out there. | ||
| Alexander Priyad, our communications director. | ||
| Karabas, Dan Floyd, Carlos and Cameron on the production team. | ||
| Vish, wherever you are, somewhere in the universe. | ||
| So, we could not have done this without you in the audience. | ||
| Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States, returns today in a dramatic return to the nation's capital. | ||
| You'll be hearing it all over the next couple of days on War Room Pandemic as President Trump comes back for a historic fight, a constitutional crisis and a national security crisis all upon us inside the framework of the Chinese Communist Party virus and the pandemic. | ||
| Until next year, War Room Pandemic. |
Export Selection