Jan. 18, 2021 - Bannon's War Room
48:50
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. | ||
| 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 100 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, then the worst happens. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
| Pandemic. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Okay, welcome back to the War Room. | ||
| We're so packed with stuff today, we can't even do our cold opens. | ||
| We had some great ones set up, but can't do it. | ||
| On Saturday, we were honored to have the chairman of the Wyoming GOP, who's got one of the best GOPs in the nation, very unified. | ||
| And he came on, Chairman Ethorn, to talk about how they were going to hold Liz Cheney responsible for her vote, where she didn't give anybody a heads-up, hadn't talked to anybody after it. | ||
| And I think we know from around town that she's a little rattled about what's going out in Wyoming. | ||
| She thought this thing would play much, much better, of her stepping up and really leading the charge and calling the shots. | ||
| calling the 1 million people that showed up a mob, right? | ||
| And condemning President Trump and voting for his impeachment and really leading the charge in most of that. | ||
| And Steny Hoyer used her words to really beat down on the president in his closing remarks. | ||
| There's been a lot of breaking news out of Wyoming over the weekend. | ||
| The folks in Wyoming were very supportive of Chairman Ethorn's interview. | ||
| And particularly, they love that statement that collectively the Wyoming GOP sent out about Liz Cheney. | ||
| And now we've got some breaking news. | ||
| I want to bring in Corey a Joey Corenti the fourth Joey the current Joey Corenti the fourth he is chairman of the Carbon County Wyoming Republican Party Joey. | ||
| Thank you very much for joining us here on war room pandemic Good morning, Steve. | ||
| Thanks for having me Honored, sir. | ||
| In Carbon County, tell us what you guys have just done, and we'll talk about the implication. | ||
| What action did you take regarding Liz Cheney's vote? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, on Saturday, we sat down and had a central committee meeting in Carbon County, and we discussed some of the things that had gone on over the past week, and took some information that we had gotten from the public in a couple of town halls that I had held on Zoom and Facebook over the last few days. | |
| Just really try to get a temperature and a pulse from what the county voters felt and we put together a formal resolution of censure against the actions of Representative Cheney and also in that resolution called for her to appear before the body to explain those actions to the voters. | ||
| Basically we Enforce what our definition of a representative is. | ||
| If you take an action and use our name to do it, we're going to ask you to come and tell us about it and why you did it, especially if we disagree with it. | ||
| Joey, let me ask you, did she give anybody in Carbon County, did she call you or her people reach out to you? | ||
| Did they give you a heads up before she did this? | ||
| Did she walk, since she represents Wyoming and represents Carbon County, did she walk through her logic and explain to you folks before she took that vote and particularly before she used the wording that she referred to MAGA people? | ||
| Did anybody on her staff or her or anybody reach out to you guys and walk you through her logic? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Not that I know of. | |
| I haven't gotten any responses stating that she attempted to reach out to any of us in the mob here. | ||
| What I do know is that since this has happened, a multitude of individuals have attempted to get a hold of her via email, telephone. | ||
| All the voicemails are full. | ||
| There's no response to emails. | ||
| There has been no response to the state letter. | ||
| And even here in Carbon County, we have a individual that is a coordinator for Team Cheney, which is the organization that does the ongoing representatives support work, who has since resigned because she couldn't even get any feedback from her own team on what's going on, let alone a heads up before it happened. | ||
| Okay, this century you've offered, have you given a date that you wanted to come back and address this or just do it from DC and Zoom? | ||
| Have you given her every opportunity to address you folks and to talk through what she did and why she did it? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I do have my contact information provided. | |
| She can get a hold of me anytime and I've sent out to every contact I know for her, reaching out to let her know this is what we've done. | ||
| I think what's most important is That other counties in Wyoming have picked this up and are going to try to run with it before our state meeting. | ||
| And what I didn't want to do was lock it into a Carbon County only call to appear. | ||
| So what I think we'll do is wait until our state meeting in a couple of weeks and attempt to pass the resolution at the state level and call her to appear in front of the state party body, state central committee. | ||
| So that she's not just coming to one county. | ||
| Because it's not just Carbon County that was affected by this. | ||
| It was 195,000 voters in Wyoming, and it has adverse effects across the nation. | ||
| Very adverse, and throughout the world. | ||
| Joey, how do people get to find out more about the Carbon County GOP? | ||
| Your social media handles, how do people get to it? | ||
|
unidentified
|
We're on Facebook, Carbon County Wyoming Republican Party. | |
| And you can look me up, Joey Carrente, Roman numeral 4, on Facebook. | ||
| We don't do a whole lot of social media out here because we're a small county and we literally have extremely limited internet access. | ||
| So we do a lot of the old snail mail, talking in coffee shops, reaching out to people over the phone, but the resolution has posted my contact information Is available in there and you can always go to the Wyoming GOP website and get information on contacting any of the county chairs and find out what's going on in the Wyoming GOP. | ||
| Joey, thank you very much for joining us on War Room Pandemic. | ||
| The pressure builds up out in Wyoming for a full accountability for Liz Cheney. | ||
| Now I want to bring in Richard Barris, the pollster of the MAGA movement, did such a great job for us on election night and subsequently to that. | ||
| I want to start, and Rahim, I want you to jump in here because you're our polling guy. | ||
| Richie, I just want to make, let's clear out the smoke in the fog of war here. | ||
| Where do you think President Trump stands and Joe Biden? | ||
| I want to start with Joe Biden, and I saw a thing on CNN over the weekend that they were in shock and meltdown on. | ||
| If we can somehow pull up the, do we have Richard Barris? | ||
| Is Richard Barris going to join us? | ||
| Okay, and then maybe we can put up that graph later. | ||
| Only, I think they had 69% of the Republicans I did not think Joe Biden was legitimate or legal, and CNN went through a full meltdown, right? | ||
| And I want to talk about overall where the polling is. | ||
| It looks like it's 40 to 45 percent overall in the nation. | ||
| Just walk us through the legitimacy. | ||
| I know YouTube doesn't want us talking about this, but unfortunately the American people do want us to talk about this, and so we will talk about this, and we will provide information, only facts. | ||
| So Richard Barris, walk us through where we stand with Joe Biden getting ready to take the oath of office Wednesday and come forward with this big program of his. | ||
| Where does he stand with his legitimacy in front of the American people? | ||
| Yeah, that's about, so 45%, we've asked this, 45% is about right. | ||
| So overall, there's an overwhelming about 74, 75%. | ||
| Ironically, some of these polls were pretty close to what we found, outside of asking those questions, even though they're way off. | ||
| 74, 75% of what? | ||
| Of Republicans, 74, 75%. | ||
| But then, you know, independents, Steve, are in the 40s as well. | ||
| 75% of what? | ||
| When you say, of what? | ||
| What is that? | ||
| Of Republicans, 74, 75%. | ||
| But then, you know, independents, Steve, are in the 40s as well. | ||
| So overall, you know, 45 to 47%, 48%, even as high as one point, I think Joe Biden won this election through some kind of fraud. | ||
| So or that it was. | ||
| I just want to I just want to make sure. | ||
| But I want to go slow here because we've got to make sure that people understand the numbers. | ||
| In the CNN poll, Rahim correct me and Richard correct me, independents were 33 percent, right? | ||
| Wasn't it two-thirds felt legit? | ||
| So independents in the CNN I think were 33 percent. | ||
| Your other polling in Rasmussen shows it's as high as 40 percent of independents, right? | ||
| 74 to 75. | ||
| It's got 69 up to 75 percent of your polls. | ||
| These are pretty enormous numbers, are they not, Mr. Barris and Mr. Rahim Kassam? | ||
| Yeah, I mean, just from what we found, Rahim, historically, that's huge. | ||
| It's huge. | ||
| And even before the election, I mean, I don't know why so many people are surprised. | ||
| We asked in six different battleground states and everywhere from Florida, Arizona to Pennsylvania and Michigan, at least 40%. | ||
| Uh, expected that there would be some, uh, degree of fraud. | ||
| Uh, anywhere between, uh, some to a great deal. | ||
| So, this isn't particularly surprising to me. | ||
| Uh, they're shocked by it, but they were hoping this would go over smoothly, people would forget and move on. | ||
| And that- that's not gonna happen. | ||
| That's a pipe dream at this point. | ||
| Some of the data within these polls is absolutely extraordinary. | ||
| I think it needs to be seized upon by the political right, by the people around the President, which still is Donald Trump right now. | ||
| I mean take for instance one of these things in the Hart Research Associates NBC survey which is asked, compared with past several presidents, do you feel that Donald Trump will turn out to have been one of the very best, better than most, not as good as most, or definitely worse than most of them? | ||
| And you know, Donald Trump's numbers are not just broadly in line with someone like George W. Bush in terms of his, in terms of the people that don't like him, but in terms of the people that do like him, his numbers are in line with Barack Obama and almost double what Ronald Reagan's were. | ||
| So the curiosity behind all of this is, yes, it comes back to what we clearly know, that the nation is very, very clearly politically divided. | ||
| But it also comes down to this. | ||
| Everybody and every time the pollsters all tell you, hey, you know, the president's unpopular, he's sinking in popularity in his last week, it's going to be terrible. | ||
| Their own numbers simply do not bear this out. | ||
| And I'll mention another one of the summary of the tables that they mentioned here, okay? | ||
| The total positive rate for Donald Trump here in this Hart Research Poll is 40%. | ||
| You put that up against the Republican Party itself is just 29%. | ||
| Kamala Harris is only at 41%. | ||
| The Democratic Party is at 39%. | ||
| Mike Pence at 38%. | ||
| It seems Donald Trump is remarkably popular. | ||
| So, Richard, I want to... | ||
| You see Gallup and you see Drudge have headlines with Pew leaving an all-time low approval rating, Nixon-like, and then you see the NBC survey. | ||
| So walk folks through so they can get their sea legs here, right? | ||
| Give us a Richard Barrett say, here's what you really ought to be focused on, here's what reality is. | ||
| And then you have CNN somewhere in the middle, right? | ||
| So, this is why I spent a week after the election, though, going over each pollster's track record. | ||
| Because, in truth, over the last four years, and even during the primary and leading into the 2016 election, some of these pollsters are just incapable of polling Trump supporters, who don't really like to talk to pollsters. | ||
| And I try to give some of them the benefit of the doubt, where It's textbook response bias. | ||
| If you look at Gallup, they swing wildly with how many different partisans and even different demographics they speak with month to month. | ||
| And I give them the benefit of the doubt. | ||
| But when you have somebody like Langer Research for the Washington Post, Steve, that's the pollster who had Biden plus 17 in Wisconsin. | ||
| It's important to remember that. | ||
| We have to take these results with caveats. | ||
| Not all pollsters are created equally. | ||
| I believe, and this is just as somebody who has reached Trump voters and Trump supporters and has a better track record than them, it is impossible for Donald Trump to be at 29%. | ||
| He has his core support is too strong. | ||
| He is not like a George W. Bush where we saw white evangelicals finally begin to abandon him during the economic crisis. | ||
| The Iraq war was going poorly and they started to abandon him and he fell into into the 30s. | ||
| That's just not the case with Donald Trump because voters supported him for a different reason. | ||
| And so far he really had, which it was to fight and fight for those issues that they cared about. | ||
| And he never let them down there like we saw with Bush's and Nixon did not have the same kind of group of supporters that Trump has. | ||
| They're loyal to him because he remained loyal to them. | ||
| And I really think it's almost, it's statistically impossible for the man to be at 29%. | ||
| I could see 38 or even 40% on a bad day, but we consistently found him 42 to 48% and it was hard to move the numbers any direction either way. | ||
| How difficult, we got 30 seconds, how difficult is it going to be for Biden to get traction when, you know, around 40 to 45% of the people think this may be illegal or illegitimate? | ||
| How tough is that going to be? | ||
| Yeah, I think that's why they're just going to move quickly to, you know, move with power, make power moves, nuking the filibuster. | ||
| They'll have to do that, Steve, because they know the truth. | ||
| They know the truth. | ||
| I really find it hard to believe they believe Langer Research. | ||
| I just, I don't buy it. | ||
| Richard Barris, how do you get to you? | ||
| I've got 10 seconds. | ||
| How do people get to you? | ||
| I'm still on Twitter, at peoples underscore pundit, and they can also follow me on creator, at peoples pundit, and on locals, at peoples pundit. | ||
| Thank you, Richard Burress. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Bear with us, we'll be back in a moment with Rahim's analysis of how we got here. | |
| Hey welcome back to War Room Pandemic. | ||
| I want to flip it over to Raheem. | ||
| How did we get here in this latest developments on Capitol Hill? | ||
| Yeah, I just want to relay to the audience something about what you're watching in real time and what you've heard. | ||
| The live audience in real time has heard several things. | ||
| You saw the smoke and people in the live chat actually, which you can get by going to americasvoice.news. | ||
| People in the live chat first alerted me to the smoke, you know, a third of a mile away from us sitting here on Capitol Hill here in the Green Zone. | ||
| So I looked it up, and we put the pictures up there of the smoke, and it turns out, hey, okay, it's one of these camps under the freeway that's getting, or highway, or motorway, whatever you call it, that appears to be burning, but they evacuated the capital, they put all the notices were blaring over the loudspeakers, the inauguration rehearsal was put on ice, and now it turns out, okay, yeah, they're fine, they're letting people back in. | ||
| And then there's the other thing. | ||
| Remember this weekend we heard about this armed man who was stopped coming into DC, had 500 rounds on him, all that kind of thing. | ||
| And the media hypes that and hypes that and hypes that. | ||
| And then it turns out that in the bottom of their stories as of this morning, they've put little tiny additional, no correction, no retraction, but a little tiny bit of information. | ||
| Oh, wait a minute. | ||
| He was a security contractor. | ||
| Can I throw the screen up here? | ||
| Here's the only people telling you about it. | ||
| Oh, it's thenationalpulse.com. | ||
| Armed Virginia man arrested in D.C. | ||
| was actually a security contractor. | ||
| I want to make sure everybody understands this. | ||
| This blew up over the weekend. | ||
| A guy who was a contractor, security guy, at 7th and I think Constitution, had worked there for a couple of days. | ||
| Right? | ||
| Coming back in and they said, hey, your pass is not ready. | ||
| He says, hey, this is the pass you gave me. | ||
| And he did have, by the way, he did have his guns in the back. | ||
| But he said, hey, inadvertently meant it. | ||
| But this is a guy that's worked there for a couple of days. | ||
| They never put the correction up so you could see it all was, oh, they caught a MAGA guy coming in here. | ||
| That was one. | ||
| The other one was a woman who went up to one of these barriers and said that she was actually on the president's cabinet. | ||
| And you didn't see the breaking in from MSNBC or CNN. | ||
| You know, they broke in with that story. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Alert! | |
| the height of at least what we've seen out here physically correct? And you didn't see the breaking in from MSNBC or CNN, you know they broke in with that story, alert, alert, the capital's under attack again. | ||
| The guy's got 500 rounds on him! | ||
| They didn't break in then with the correction and say, ah, sorry about that, it was actually a security contractor. | ||
| Nobody told you that. | ||
| And the deal is for this, let's throw the laptop back up on the screen here, the deal is for this. | ||
| Because a congressman has just introduced a new bill, and we picked up on it, it just went up on the Congress website, and what they want to do is actually keep the perimeter, As it's been established, they want to keep it for good. | ||
| This is Congressman Richie Torres, who has said that he's put forward a bill to construct a fence around the perimeter of the U.S. | ||
| Capitol. | ||
| Think about this, ladies and gentlemen. | ||
| Think about this. | ||
| These are the people who tell you, A, it's your house, it's the people's house, this is the desecration of the sacred blah blah blah, it's your house. | ||
| Now they want to keep you out forever. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And then number two, these are the same people who say walls don't work. | ||
| You don't need a wall. | ||
| You don't need closed borders. | ||
| That doesn't work. | ||
| But they want one around the Capitol now for good. | ||
| The bill, H.R. | ||
| 339, seeks to, quote, direct the architect of the Capitol to design and install an appropriate fence around the perimeter of the United States Capitol, including the East Front and the West Front. | ||
| I gotta tell you guys, you have to light up the phone lines right now to your congressman and say, hey, this is unacceptable. | ||
| If it's really the people's house, you do not stop the people from getting within a mile of that place. | ||
| That is some Soviet-era BS. | ||
| They want to keep this as a green zone. | ||
| It's obvious about that. | ||
| But here's more importantly, We still gotta ask the question, and the FBI and the DOJ have not come forward, what is the difference in the threat level, besides chatter, what's the difference in the threat level today, right, when he puts the bill forward, that it was on January 4th or 5th? | ||
| Right? | ||
| When Mayor Bowser specifically came out on numerous occasions, says, I don't want U.S. | ||
| Marshals, I don't want National Guard, I don't want the military. | ||
| They have all the press release from her and her public comments. | ||
| And Nancy Pelosi, whose job it is, she's the one responsible, just kept the bicycle racks up there with the Capitol Hill police. | ||
| Didn't ask for any reinforcements or no kind of show of force or no even kind of more logical way that you block off the Capitol just for the State of the Union. | ||
| I mean, State of the Union is done once a year. | ||
| The Capitol is Basically secured. | ||
| And they're now saying they knew in advance. | ||
| They knew in advance, they were tracking people talking about this stuff in advance. | ||
| So what has happened here? | ||
| Has the FBI been too busy, and I know we'll get into it with Jack Posobiec in the next segment, but has the FBI been too busy vetting the political views of National Guardsmen? | ||
| Let's talk about that. | ||
| To deal with, you know, the threat that came from the shaman. | ||
| They're doing social media sweeps on National Guard. | ||
| To make sure they're not Trump supporters, effectively. | ||
| That's what they're looking for. | ||
| They're looking for any signs that you've supported the President of the United States over the last four or five years to stop you being a National Guardsman that protects the Capitol building or maybe even have that position at all, right? | ||
| And that's the FBI right now. | ||
| I think. | ||
| Do we have that clip, by the way? | ||
| Do we have the clip from Chernobyl? | ||
| I want to get this clip up because it's so to the point. | ||
| It's so on the money about what's taking place here right now. | ||
| I wonder if you can let me know, Producer Cameron, when we have that clip. | ||
| But here's the kicker about all of this stuff, right, is how did we get here in the first instance? | ||
| I realised over the weekend, with some mental clarity, some downtime, in the car down to Richmond this weekend, thinking and thinking, I realised, oh my goodness, how did we not put two and two together? | ||
| Radicalisation doesn't take place over the course of an afternoon. | ||
| Radicalization doesn't take place over the course of one speech. | ||
| The timeline doesn't work out within any way, right? | ||
| Radicalization takes place over the course of years and years and years. | ||
| So I started to look into who has been demonizing Congress as an institution over the last decade. | ||
| It's been the media. | ||
| And people will see on their screens here, and I'll just scroll a little bit here for you, let's put this up on the screen. | ||
| People can see that chyron at the bottom of that CNN story poll, Congress worst in our lifetimes, right? | ||
| And I think we can also get the... | ||
| I don't want to do the Chernobyl here. | ||
| We'll do that in the next segment. | ||
| Let's get the slideshow up here of which precisely news organizations have been talking about this stuff. | ||
| Now let's forward pass this. | ||
| This is an op-ed. | ||
| This is the Brookings Institution talking about how Congress is broken. | ||
| You can see the dates on your screen. | ||
| New York Magazine there as well. | ||
| The worst Congress ever. | ||
| Let's keep going. | ||
| The Star Tribune, the worst Congress ever. | ||
| Let's keep going. | ||
| Confirmed, this is the worst Congress ever. | ||
| More news outlets and you will keep rolling this stuff. | ||
| This is the worst Congress ever. | ||
| This back in 2013. | ||
| You see these articles in 2014, in 2015, in Bloomberg. | ||
| They set about a course to tell the American public, hey, you're Your president sucks and is corrupt and is controlled by Vladimir Putin. | ||
| Your Congress is the worst Congress ever. | ||
| Defund the police. | ||
| They're murdering black people indiscriminately on the streets. | ||
| They have set about a course of delegitimizing and radicalizing people against the very institutions that were supposed to uphold the Constitution and the Republic how we know it. | ||
| And here's the thing, I want to go back to the laptop here please Denver, you can see the period time it takes to radicalize somebody on your screens. | ||
| This is from data that I went through this weekend, radicalization experts, and it shows in the numbers you're seeing there in the chart, it's a number of months on average that it takes. | ||
| It doesn't take an afternoon, it doesn't take a speech, you can't incite people to commit violence and aggression over the course of a morning, even if the timeline with Trump worked out. | ||
| No, you're looking at Male radicalization timeline of 52 months. | ||
| Where does this take us back to? | ||
| It takes us back to about mid-2016 and what was going on in mid-2016. | ||
| Foreign Policy Magazine was telling us that it's the worst Congress ever. | ||
| Bloomberg was telling us it's the worst Congress ever. | ||
| The talking heads on CNN were telling us it's the worst Congress ever. | ||
| Because it was a Republican Congress. | ||
| Because it was a Republican Congress that wasn't allowing Barack Obama to get through more of his far, far left policies. | ||
| And so what they decided, it's very clear, even in their comments, and everyone please go to thenationalpulse.com, read this thing today. | ||
| It's a proper essay, fully cited, all the links are there. | ||
| There's a guy called Norm Ornstein and Norm Ornstein's an academic, he's a democrat by his own admission, he's an academic and he writes about all these things and what he says, what he admits in his own article from back in, I think it was 2013 he first published this and then there was a whole firestorm around, wow, isn't Ornstein a genius? | ||
| For calling Congress the worst ever. | ||
| What he says openly is that it's the worst Congress ever because it isn't doing the bidding of a left-wing president and that's not Congress's job. | ||
| It's not Congress's job to fall in line with the executive branch. | ||
| Look at the screen that I'm putting in front of you here. | ||
| This is a Google Trends analysis of the term worst Congress and you can see it spikes every so often As the media tries to push this narrative about how terrible Congress is. | ||
| And sure enough, it's been borne out in action. | ||
| Gabby Giffords was a victim of this. | ||
| Rand Paul has been a victim of this. | ||
| Steve Scalise and everybody at the Congressional Baseball game was a victim of this. | ||
| Did they put perimeter around the Congress when Steve Scalise was shot in the hip, by the way? | ||
| When there was an attack by a Bernie Sanders supporter on congressmen? | ||
| No, they did not. | ||
| And there was no additional security put in there. | ||
| And then let's look at the echo chamber here, Rolling Stone, Foreign Policy Magazine, The Economist. | ||
| It goes on and on and on and it's borne out in the polling too. | ||
| I published this polling last week but it shows us what? | ||
| It shows us that at 9-11 congressional approval was 84% and that was an anomaly of course, it was 9-11. | ||
| But prior to that it hovered around the mid-fifties. | ||
| After the media's assault and attack on the Congress as an institution, It went down to nine percent. | ||
| And you want to ask the question and answer the question, who radicalized the fringe elements in the United States of America to attack the United States Congress? | ||
| Your answer is the American media. | ||
| But the radicalized element, or people that feel they're outside the system, is still relatively small. | ||
| I understand that they've done a full beatdown on the institutions, and quite frankly, these institutions have been dysfunctional. | ||
| These institutions, I don't think, have been on top of things, and they need to be rejuvenated, right? | ||
| Still, the MAGA movement, you see this on the March 12th, the power of the march on the November 12th, the 13th, 14th, whatever it was, was peaceful. | ||
| This huge outpouring of being peaceful. | ||
| That is the same, that is 99.9999% of the people that showed up, the million people that showed up for the President's speech. | ||
| On the 6th, another peaceful demonstration, peaceful protest of wanting their representatives to do what they felt was the right thing and was the right thing to do. | ||
| Okay, we'll take a short commercial break. | ||
| Pacific will join us. | ||
| Frank Gaffney is going to join us. | ||
| Talk in China. | ||
| And also, this thing about the military now being cleared to make sure their supporters abide. | ||
|
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. | ||
| Yes, professor? | ||
| My associate was... was arrested last night. | ||
| Oh? | ||
| I mean no disrespect, but I was wondering if you could tell me why. | ||
| I'm sorry, I don't know who you're talking about. | ||
| She was arrested by the KGB. | ||
| You are the first Deputy Chairman of the KGB. | ||
| I am? | ||
| That's why I don't have to bother with arresting people anymore. | ||
| But you are bothering with having us followed. | ||
| I think the Deputy Chairman is busy. | ||
| No, no. | ||
| It's perfectly understandable. | ||
| Comrade, I know you've heard the stories about us. | ||
| When I hear them, even I am shocked. | ||
| But we are not what people say. | ||
| Yes, people are following you. | ||
| People are following those people. | ||
| And you see them? | ||
|
unidentified
|
They follow me. | |
| The KGB is a circle of accountability. | ||
| Nothing more. | ||
| You know the work we're doing here? | ||
| You really don't trust us? | ||
| Of course I do. | ||
| But you know the old Russian proverb? | ||
| Trust but verify. | ||
| And the Americans think that Ronald Reagan thought that up. | ||
| Can you imagine? | ||
| Inside the circle of accountability in the green zone that was our nation's capital, I want to turn to Jack Posobiec, Naval Intelligence Officer, speaks fluent Mandarin, and also one of the great news reporters over at One American News. | ||
| Raheem Kassam, take it. | ||
| Jack, I wonder if you can let us know more of what you're hearing about this, the FBI investigating members of the National Guard for their political allegiances, and specifically, I know you have some questions that you think may be being posed to those National Guard members. | ||
| A very serious situation, but also so ludicrous, you can't help but think back to that clip we played from Chernobyl and just go, oh my goodness, how is this happening in America? | ||
| Yeah, I can't imagine, you know, what it's like. | ||
| And I actually have reached out to people and seriously, though, I have reached out to people and have them reach out to me. | ||
| Moms of soldiers, people who are down there at the Capitol saying, yeah, they came in, they're asking about his Facebook posts. | ||
| You know, in some cases, they actually know who they are and they've been assigned to areas away from the green zone. | ||
| But I'm waiting. | ||
| In a couple of days, you have to imagine they'll bring in the guys from Chernobyl, you know. | ||
| Papers, please. | ||
| May we see your social media? | ||
| Do you have the War Room Pandemic app installed on your phone? | ||
| One America News? | ||
| Have you texted and downloaded the app? | ||
| Yes, yes. | ||
| We see indications that you may have shared a meme. | ||
| A meme, a pro-Trump meme of the MAGA movement. | ||
| I mean, it's it's it's completely absurd. | ||
| And by the way, by the way, we're laughing. | ||
| But if it's not funny, if you're a member of this completely illegal, what they're doing is completely legal. | ||
| It's unconstitutional. | ||
| It's un-American. | ||
| And if you know about a situation like this or involved in a situation like this, I would urge you and I would urge the commanders down there, go to your I.G., go to your I.G. | ||
| immediately about this civil rights Violation. | ||
| A complete civil rights violation. | ||
| Go down there today. | ||
| March straight into that office. | ||
| And tell them what you're asking and open up an investigation because we do have reporting that shows that it's not the President of the United States that's putting this up. | ||
| By the way, remember one president at a time? | ||
| I guess we don't have that anymore. | ||
| No, it's Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are the ones who are pushing this. | ||
| They're putting pressure on the Secretary of the Army. | ||
| They're putting pressure on the Department of Defense, the Pentagon to go through and vet. | ||
| Can you believe that? | ||
| To vet the soldiers that are there? | ||
| They've been ordered to be there, right? | ||
| These are National Guard. | ||
| These are people, some of the finest people in the United States, and they're going to go and accuse them without any evidence of just because they hold conservative beliefs, just because they hold conservative sentiments because they voted for Donald Trump, that they may commit violence or they may even fail to follow orders. | ||
| And how sad is that? | ||
| And I'm going to say this, that the Republican Party is not standing up for conservatives. | ||
| They're not speaking out against this. | ||
| You got Bill Maher. | ||
| You got Bill Maher on HBO, of all people, who's standing up for conservatives more than the Republican Party right now. | ||
| Yeah, where is the GOP right now, by the way? | ||
| Why haven't we got any congressmen, any senators coming out against this, you know, perimeter for life, perimeter forever around the Capitol, around what's going on to the National Guard, what's going on to people on social media? | ||
| Where are these people? | ||
| Do we not have any veteran Republicans in Congress? | ||
| I'm confused. | ||
| I think you've got a lot. | ||
| Look, if you look at all the polling data, there's a huge amount of active duty service members that are MAGA believers and America First believers and believers in President Trump as people that are Democrats. | ||
| You have a full right to believe on politics what you want to believe. | ||
| I want to shift. | ||
| We're going to have Frank Gaffney in a second come on, but this bombshell report by DNI Radcliffe Over the weekend, Jack, about China involvement in the 2020 election suppressed, it looks like, by the CIA. | ||
| Walk people through, is this the report people were waiting for that DNI owed the President, I think, by the 3rd of December, or 45 days, 17th of December, the 45 days after the election, by law or by executive order, he owed the President a report on foreign influence in the campaign or in the election? | ||
| What is this explosive document? | ||
| That's exactly right. | ||
| That's what this document is. | ||
| But what you're actually seeing, and if you go back to my reporting from December 16th, so over a month ago, we had indications that Ratcliffe was upset with the report and that he was delaying it because specifically, we knew that at the time, high-level agencies and high-level officials were blocking what was going into that report. | ||
| And that's why it was originally delayed. | ||
| I think everybody remembers that. | ||
| They delayed a report that the president had ordered on his desk. | ||
| The specific reason for the delay, that's what's now coming out. | ||
| And so Ratcliffe has written a letter regarding the entire situation. | ||
| He wrote that China interfered in our election and that this was suppressed by the management of the CIA. | ||
| Not only did they disagree on it, but they were going around to other agencies and getting them to take their name off of this analysis. | ||
| He's got a report from, and by the way, this isn't just him alleging it. | ||
| He's not just saying it. | ||
| He's got a report by the intelligence community analytic ombudsman, Barry Zaloff. | ||
| He's the director of the DNI, then came out and said, analysts were reluctant to describe China's actions as election interference because they disagreed with the policies of President Donald Trump. | ||
| And the specific intelligence, right? | ||
| I think I reported this at the time, but I want to bring it up again. | ||
| The specific raw intelligence was indications that Chinese networks were infiltrating American social media Facebook, Twitter, you name it, and amplifying messaging, probably TikTok as well, amplifying messaging that painted President Trump as a white supremacist. | ||
| And I want to go back to Ratcliffe's words specifically. | ||
| He wrote that based on all available sources of intelligence with definitions consistently applied and reached independent of political considerations or undue pressure. | ||
| The People's Republic of China sought to influence the 2020 US federal elections. | ||
| Here's the explosive piece, I want to go back. | ||
| Mike Pompeo put out a statement on Friday talking about putting out the Wuhan, the direct link to the PLA and to the Wuhan lab, which by the way, Bill Gertz on the 20th of January, remember we started the show, had already done a report about how the PLA was running Wuhan and he was mocked and ridiculed by the Washington Post. | ||
| We were mocked and ridiculed for having Bill Gertz. | ||
| We broke the story on the show. | ||
| We were mocked and ridiculed. | ||
| came out to be true, the State Department. Then what Pompeo said is that President Trump's policies reversed what, 20 years of appeasement to the Chinese Communist Party. And then you see what Radcliffe said. | ||
| The intelligence services, and this is everybody's worst nightmare, are not doing their jobs because they disagree with the Commander-in-Chief's policies. | ||
| Look, I'm not a Deep State guy because I say it's in your face, but for people that believe in the Deep State, Jack, this letter by Ratcliffe and the accusations by the ombudsman Right, by the ombudsman, the intelligent ombudsman are as explosive as they get, are they not? | ||
| That's exactly right. | ||
| So this is an actual report where he's gone around now, and of course Ratcliffe has to be very careful, he's not revealing The specific sources and methods, he's out revealing the analyst names, anything like that. | ||
| Obviously a lot of classified information here. | ||
| So for those who have been watchers of this community and former members of the intelligence community, you know that when something like this bubbles out into the public, that what's going on behind closed doors, I mean, this is about as angry and nasty as it gets in the intelligence community. | ||
| No fighting in the war room, right? | ||
| But I want to go back to the words of Ratcliffe's op-ed that he published last December, because now we know what he meant when he wrote it. | ||
| He wrote, The world is being presented a choice between two wholly incompatible ideologies. | ||
| China's leaders seek to subordinate the rights of the individual to the will of the Chinese Communist Party, the CCP. | ||
| We now know that Ratcliffe wrote that statement in such a way that he included not only the Lao Baixing, the old hundred names of China, he was talking about US citizens in the 2020 election as well. | ||
| One thing that would be helpful if Radcliffe came up because there's a lot of We've seen stuff around, I guess, Dennis Montgomery and this concept of HAMR and, you know, we're not going to validate that here. | ||
| It takes a lot more to do it. | ||
| However, people are talking about, you know, Chinese involvement in a massive way and systemically in the flow of information that night. | ||
| And now you have Ratcliffe coming out. | ||
| Are you sure it's just Wu Mao 50 Cent Army? | ||
| Is that where we are with the Wu Mao 50 Cent Army? | ||
| You think it's just social media? | ||
| Or could Ratcliffe be indicating it may be bigger than that, Jack? | ||
| And how are we supposed to know unless Ratcliffe comes forward and lets us know before President Trump leaves office? | ||
| I would urge DNI Ratcliffe to come out and go to the President of the United States, hand him a list of specific documents, That can be declassified by the authority of the president that he still has for several days to declassify those documents so that we know exactly what China was up to and any, by the way, any other foreign adversary in 2020. | ||
| Were they influencing this? | ||
| Were they influencing social media? | ||
| We need to get to the bottom of it. | ||
| The president has declassification authority and I would say because of this report from the ombudsman of the intelligence community, he now has the imperative You know, is the imperative to do this because we know that the intelligence community is trying to squash this information from getting out to US political leaders and to the American people. | ||
| Jack, hang on, I want to bring on now Frank Gaffney for the Center for Security Policy and co-founder of the Committee on the Present Danger, China. | ||
| Frank, I want to get to your article after the break, the explosive article in National Pulse about CCP being a transnational criminal organization, but I've got to get your thoughts on Ratcliffe's letter over the weekend. | ||
| You've been arguing this for a long time, that there's members of the broader intelligence community that just don't like President Trump and don't like his policies and they're not following his orders, they're going to do what they do. | ||
| How explosive is Ratcliffe's letter? | ||
| I confess I haven't seen the letter, Steve, but I think what he's contending with clearly is the manifestations of the deep state that has operated against this president. | ||
| Going back, of course, notably to Brennan's day, but under Gina Haspel, his protégé, A woman who I believe was directly implicated in the effort to take down Donald Trump because she was sent back to be the chief of station in Britain. | ||
| Something that's almost, I think, if not without precedent, certainly very, very unusual. | ||
| And she was there during the time that Brennan was running ops against then-candidate Trump. | ||
| To put her in charge of the CIA was unimaginable, and now Ratcliffe's deputy, Susan Gordon-Gell, is clearly playing for the other team as well. | ||
| It's a prime example of what I think you call the original sin. | ||
| of this administration that it entrusted personnel to people who were absolutely hostile to this president and worked to populate his administration with people like them. | ||
| Frank, hang on for one second. | ||
| We're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| We're going to come back with your explosive article in National Pulse that the President needs to designate the Chinese Communist Party as a transnational criminal organization before he leaves office. | ||
| Jack Pasovic, Frank Gaffney will join us after the break. | ||
| Rahim Ghassan, Stephen K. Bannon, be back in a second. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And we'll see you in a second. | |
| We rejoice when there's no more left to die for 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, up on the National Pulse, there's a great story right now about the President of the United States should designate the Chinese Communist Party as a transnational criminal enterprise before he leaves office for a while. | ||
| Frank Gaffney, over to you. | ||
| What's your argument for this? | ||
| Why do you think it's imperative that the President do this? | ||
| Steve, the case for designating the Chinese Communist Party has been made by this administration to a fairly well from the president on down. | ||
| I think the most recent item in the bill of particulars in such an indictment was that provided by Mike Pompeo at the end of last week. | ||
| You've covered it closely. | ||
| The fact that the Chinese COVID virus came apparently out of a biological weapons laboratory in Wuhan, a facility that, by virtue of the fact it is part of the Chinese Communist Party's illegal biological weapons program, means that this is a crime. | ||
| And it is a crime that has had unprecedented implications, not just for this country, where we've lost What is it? | ||
| Almost 400,000 people to the CCP virus. | ||
| But now, as you've documented with this program, worldwide, literally. | ||
| I mean, Gordon Chang, our friend, has talked about this being the first time in history that one country has attacked the entire rest of the world. | ||
| That's a crime. | ||
| That's a crime against humanity. | ||
| So is the use of fentanyl to try to conduct some kind of opium war against this country, killing By some estimates 30,000, maybe many more Americans every single year. | ||
| There's the economic warfare crimes, the theft of our intellectual property, our personal information and corporate data, including military secrets. | ||
| There's the evidence of, unfortunately, the kind of crimes against humanity that have been waged by the Chinese Communist Party against captive nations. | ||
| Namely, the Uyghurs, the Tibetans, the Southern Mongolians. | ||
| And against their own people, for that matter, but also worrying is what they're beginning to do to the people of what I think of as incipient captive nations, the Belt and Road Initiative nations. | ||
| And then not least, of course, you've been devoting an enormous amount of work to this and John Ratcliffe is raising an alarm about it as well. | ||
| There's the problem that the Chinese Communist Party has violated our laws massively. | ||
| and materially to interfere in our elections in 2020. | ||
| And Steve, all of this put together makes, I believe, the case for calling the CCP what it is, a transnational criminal organization, compelling and vital for a couple of reasons. | ||
| One, it's something that the president can do, literally with the stroke of a pen. | ||
| He doesn't have to get an act of Congress. | ||
| He can do it on his own authority pursuant to an executive order that I believe you were instrumental in fashioning early on in this administration. | ||
| Secondly, this is a way to persuade, I think, induce. | ||
| Perhaps compel the financiers, some of whom you used to work with on Wall Street, the captains of industry and other C-suite level types across America, in Hollywood, in Silicon Valley and elsewhere. | ||
| That if they persist in supporting the Chinese Communist Party, they will be complicit in criminal activity. | ||
| I think that will persuade them to stop. | ||
| Frank, I've got you and Posobiec. | ||
| I've only got a couple of minutes, but I've got to ask one thing. | ||
| Just give me an answer for a minute. | ||
| How important is it for the President to declassify all of the information in the Russia fiasco around Brennan, Comey, etc.? | ||
| How important is that, and how can he do that? | ||
| I believe he has the authority to do it, as you were saying earlier before the break, Steve. | ||
| I think it's vital. | ||
| I mean, I don't know what would have to be withheld for classification of truly sensitive information that would compromise both sources and methods or the national security. | ||
| I presume that that's probably a very small portion. | ||
| What's largely being withheld to this point is politically damaging information, and that I think would almost certainly conduce to the criminal prosecution of these characters, which is long overdue, of course. | ||
| Posobiec, you're an intelligence officer. | ||
| So how important is it for the President to declassify all that information and get it out immediately? | ||
| Okay. | ||
| So, Frank, one last time, we lost Prasovic there, technical screw-up. | ||
| I've got to go back to you, we've got about a minute and a half left. | ||
| What implications, if the President designates the Chinese Communist Party as a transnational criminal organization, what would be the immediate implications of that? | ||
| Well, the first thing that it would do, Steve, and perhaps as important as anything else, you and I are Survivors, veterans of the Cold War, when you think back to what Ronald Reagan did to identify and delegitimize the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and its country as the evil empire, It was hugely important, and I think the same would be done to the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| You're bending a lot of efforts to try to bring it down. | ||
| Making clear that the Chinese Communist Party is illegitimate will help in that regard, I believe, inside China. | ||
| The other thing is that I believe that this will be a very clear point on which we will determine whether Joe Biden, a man who has been deeply compromised by the Chinese Communist Party, is going to | ||
| Come to their rescue and decertify them, de-designate them, undesignate them if you will, as a criminal enterprise when it so clearly is, would be an incredibly important tell on what kind of policies he's going to be pursuing towards China more generally. | ||
| This is a winner on every front as far as I'm concerned and I think it would begin the process of Telling the Chinese, if you want to deal with us, and presumably the rest of the world, don't bring us any Chinese Communist Party officials as interlocutors. | ||
| Huge, huge step. | ||
| Frank, how do people get to you? | ||
| We've got about 30 seconds. | ||
| How do people get to you? | ||
| Well, if they're still following Twitter and Parler and all that, I'm Frank Gaffney, but the thing I would commend people to is work we're doing at the Real America's Voice Network with you, Steve, and that is our program, SecuringAmerica.tv. | ||
| So you're one of the best. | ||
| National Pulse at three. | ||
| What do you got for him? | ||
| Going to be going through a lot of this, the radicalization stuff, as well as all the breaking news we're getting. | ||
| You see people are wondering, hey, why is the president so quiet? | ||
| I know we don't see him on Twitter, but hey, look, he just, and we got this in the breaking news section on TheNationalPulse.com as well, he just revoked $120 billion worth of licenses to sellers in America who sell to Huawei. | ||
| He's working on a lot right now. | ||
| We're going to bring you more details. | ||
| Got a huge scoop about the Lincoln Project up on the site. | ||
| A lot of executors. | ||
| We'll see you back here at 5. |
Export Selection