June 23, 2021 - Bannon's War Room
48:32
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
The virus has now killed more than 100 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 gonna 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, then the worst happens. | ||
| War Room. | ||
| Pandemic. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| We have infused so much money into the financial system that interest rates have indeed been driven down to zero. | ||
| So there's no point for anybody to really invest in bonds because there's no income stream to be had, right? | ||
| So what's happening now is all that money is being focused on the stock market, driving up the stock market. | ||
| And I've told you on this show flat out, I've said it many times now, 2021 is going to be the year of the big short. | ||
| I mean, this will collapse. | ||
| The year of the big short. | ||
| We've got Dr. Peter Navarro to talk about his economic forecast he put out a couple weeks ago on this show. | ||
| We're going to bring in Dr. Peter Navarro in a second. | ||
| Remember, Dr. Navarro is the guy who said 30 days ago, Mr. Fauci's got 90 days. | ||
| And of course, we've got Raheem Kassam and Natalie Winters here for the show today to talk about the big takedowns. | ||
| Right when we were leaving the morning show today, I want to turn now to Dr. Peter Navarro. | ||
| four noon Daily Mail posted a huge article giving a hat tip. | ||
| They sent an explosive investigative report is from the National polls. | ||
| Natalie Winters Rahim Kassam. We're gonna get to that in the next segment. | ||
| I want to turn now to dr Peter Navarro. Dr Navarro, you've been, you've been kind of the doom and gloom about what's potentially about to happen over the next several months. | ||
| Walk us through your data-based, evidence-based, science-based analysis of where we're heading as an economy and how it's going to impact the lives of our audience. | ||
| All right, Steve. | ||
| The forecast is basically for a market correction before October, certainly, and stagflation, which is a combination of slow growth or recession plus inflation. | ||
| Doesn't usually happen. | ||
| In order to understand this, let's go back to the Trump administration 2017. | ||
| We had eight years of Obama and Biden, where we had slow growth and stagnant wages, falling real wages. | ||
| The deplorables really took it in the shorts there. | ||
| What we came in and did was six structural changes. | ||
| I call them six points of the policy compass. | ||
| It was Tax cuts, deregulation, cheap energy, a rebalancing of our trade. | ||
| Those were the core campaign issues. | ||
| And to that we added increased defense spending, right? | ||
| And increased arms sales to our allies. | ||
| Now, every one of those six changes added to growth incrementally and we consistently outperformed in terms of real growth, unemployment rates and most importantly, real wages actually were going up for the deplorables, blue collar workers. | ||
| Okay? | ||
| So if Biden comes in and just on the basis of this alone, we can downgrade our forecast to slow growth or recession because he is systematically doing away with all six points of the growth compass, right? | ||
| He's canceled the arms sales. | ||
| He stopped the increases in defense spending. | ||
| He killed things like the Keystone Pipeline. | ||
| It's basically an economic train wreck. | ||
| So, in normal times, we would revert to the Obama-Biden mean of less than 2% growth, stagnant real wages, and basically a new normal, which is a Hobbesian world for the deplorable blue collars. | ||
| Okay? | ||
| Now, add to this The pandemic-related structural issues. | ||
| And there's really two things we're dealing with that create what I call service sector refugees. | ||
| These are these this large army of the unemployed that's going to create the kind of stagflation conditions. | ||
| So it comes from two places. | ||
| First, you've got the CCP virus. | ||
| Which has hit our major metropolitan areas like a neutron bomb. | ||
| It basically goes right at the pillars of metropolitan areas. | ||
| It's the commercial office buildings, it's the subway systems, it's the hotel and restaurant hospitality industry, and it's the entertainment districts. | ||
| All of those have just been hammered, just hammered. | ||
| By the pandemic. | ||
| And so what you're seeing is, is high unemployment in our metropolitan areas, service sector refugee flight. | ||
| And then on top of that, with all of the flight, you're seeing a rise in violence and crime, which is exacerbated by defund the police movements, And fear, legitimate fear, within our law enforcement agencies, that if they go out and enforce the law, somehow they'll wind up behind jail instead of the criminals. | ||
| Okay? | ||
| So, we know where the recession's coming from. | ||
| The stagflation, the inflation part, is going to come partly from wage inflation, where we've got millions of workers who are unemployed, but they don't have the skills to fill the jobs that are that are millions being advertised right now. | ||
| So you're going to have some wage inflation, even though wages are falling in the aggregate. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| The other problem we have is you've got the continuation of this fiscal and monetary stimulus policies, where you've got these trillions of dollars coursing into the veins, which gives you the more classic Kind of inflation. | ||
| And so what we have, we have is a Biden administration, which has wiped away the six growth drivers of the Trump administration, doesn't understand the structural rot that's being caused by the pandemic. | ||
| And instead of addressing that rot with aggressive policies like bringing our manufacturing home to employ those service sector refugees, All they're going to do is throw some more money at it. | ||
| Meanwhile, Jerome Powell at the Fed sits on his hands, hopes that inflation is going to be transitory. | ||
| He's got no bullets in the gun to do things. | ||
| And so we're, at some point, going to see rising inflation. | ||
| As soon as we see rising inflation, we see rising interest rates. | ||
| As soon as we see rising interest rates, the stock market crashes. | ||
| Because investors go chase return in the bond market. | ||
| So, Steve, that's where we stand. | ||
| And I feel like, you know, as one of the architects of the Trump economic plan, I feel like I'm watching a train wreck, right? | ||
| And this is a tragedy, but it's also a self-inflicted wound. | ||
| So the idea is, like, they need to wake up at the White House instead of just being woke. | ||
| OK, I want to say one thing, too. | ||
| Also in the first year, remember, Obama and Biden got out of or kind of salvaged what they thought of the wreckage of the financial collapse by the balance sheet of the Fed was $880 billion. | ||
| When they left, when Donald Trump was inaugurated, it was, what, $4.5 trillion. | ||
| All they did was add assets to the Fed, which is basically just infused cash into the system. | ||
| It made the top 1% even wealthier. | ||
| The greatest concentration of wealth, increase in the concentration of wealth in the nation's history was that in the first year, you're talking about 2017, your six-point program. | ||
| In addition, and always remember this, Donald Trump took the balance sheet of the Fed from I think 4.5 trillion down to like 3.6 trillion. | ||
| He took 800 or 900. | ||
| hundred billion dollars out of. He was starting to make sure there wasn't any kind of asset bubble. They were slowly taking it down. This is a very well thought through program and into that headwind. He's not juicing the economy. | ||
| He's actually taking juice out of the economy at the same time growing the economy and increasing real wages. | ||
| That's why 2019 is the best year for workers ever. | ||
| It actually was kind of a miracle, and I realize a lot of this was Keynesian, right? | ||
| But then, and certain things had to be done during the, or were done during the CCP virus, the first year in 2020. | ||
| But it's the Biden situation of now literally no plan, no growth plan, the bond markets voting against it, and they've got their pedal to the metal in this new infrastructure budget that Romney and these guys are signing on to. | ||
| We have no idea what the use of proceeds is, what the returns are going to be. | ||
| So Peter, we've got a couple of minutes. | ||
| Walk us through, what do you think the direction of this kind of overspending. | ||
| How do you actually stop it? | ||
| How would you tell, what's the audience to do to actually get people to stop this out of control spending and this reckless financial plan? | ||
| Well, first of all, we have to get our terminology right. | ||
| The problem is, you just called it an infrastructure bill, which is fine, but it's not, of course. | ||
| What we've got is this Robin Hood Keynesianism, right? | ||
| Where they take COVID relief, small amounts of it, and small amounts of infrastructure, and around that, they build a much bigger, multi-trillion dollar package to push forward their progressive agendas Including redistribution of income and the climate change issues. | ||
| And Romney, I mean, Romney's smarter than that. | ||
| I mean, it's like, come on, dude. | ||
| So, I think what we're seeing is the Obama people never understand the structural nature of problems in our economy. | ||
| They always think you can solve everything with Keynesian terms. | ||
| And you just can't. | ||
| And so, we need to have this debate, and it doesn't help for Jerome Powell to be telling people that he thinks inflation's transitory. | ||
| I mean, look, a big part of this inflation's going to be energy, okay? | ||
| Now, energy is usually left out of core inflation under the assumption that it's cyclical, goes up and down, up and down. | ||
| But we've got a structural change in our energy market If we're getting away from carbon, right, that augurs for a long-term upward trend rather than cyclical movement. | ||
| That means inflation. | ||
| So Powell, I mean, he gets it wrong every time. | ||
| You were talking about 2019. | ||
| We could have hit 4% growth rate if he hadn't kept doing what he was doing in terms of trying to raise rates and talking the markets down. | ||
| I've laid the case out on the table for stagflation. | ||
| I'm warning about a market correction by the end of the year, probably sooner. | ||
| And we need to have this national conversation. | ||
| We just need to have this conversation, Steve. | ||
| Otherwise, this is a train wreck and a lot of people are going to get hurt. | ||
| It's not going to be Wall Street that gets hurt. | ||
| Not going to be Wall Street. | ||
| It's going to be blue collar workers, the deplorables. | ||
| It's always on their shoulders. | ||
| Middle class Americans. | ||
| How do people get access? | ||
| Aren't you putting out a big analysis of this? | ||
| When is this going to go to print? | ||
| The War Room will know first, okay? | ||
| The War Room will know first. | ||
| I'm working it out. | ||
| So you've got a written analysis? | ||
| Yeah, yep, yep. | ||
| I will be releasing that soon and knock them dead today. | ||
| And again, tip of the hat to all the news, the National Pulse, Natalie and Raheem are breaking. | ||
| It's amazing. | ||
| The War Room is the center Of the media universe right now, because this is where all the news is getting broken. | ||
| You want to know what's going to happen in a month? | ||
| Watch today. | ||
| Dr. Peter Navarro. | ||
| Peter, how did they get to the Peter Navarro reports? | ||
| Did they want to read about the border? | ||
| If they want to read about the election fraud, all of it, how did they get to there? | ||
| How did they get to your Twitter? | ||
| PeterNavarro.com has all of the reports. | ||
| I really urge people to read all three volumes of the Navarro Report, because if you want to know what's going on in Arizona and Georgia, kind of by the numbers, and what's going to happen in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, those reports lay it all out. | ||
| They are the templates for the investigation. | ||
| And then RealPNavarro on Twitter, you know, but wean yourself from Twitter, please. | ||
| We've got to go to alternative means, because this censorship It's just out of hand. | ||
| It's just fascist wrong and we've got to overcome that. | ||
| Okay, we've got to bounce, but you're going to get back to us. | ||
| There's going to be a detailed written report, analysis, opinion piece, analysis piece by Peter Navarro going up in the next day or two. | ||
| We're going to get everybody there, but we want to give you a heads up. | ||
| You heard it first on The War Room. | ||
| Always. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| And you heard it first six weeks ago or eight weeks ago with you. | ||
| Okay, short commercial break. | ||
| We're going to return with Natalie and Raheem. | ||
| A lot of breaking news from National Pulse on everything related to Wuhan. | ||
| Be back in a moment. | ||
|
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. | ||
| So Dr. Peter Navarro is calling for a market correction in the fall sometimes. | ||
| Remember, Navarro is the guy that came on CNBC in the first, we won at 2.30 in the morning on the 9th of November of 2016. | ||
| Peter went on CNBC I think at 6 or 7 o'clock in the morning and was talking about Dow, I think it was 20,000. | ||
| At the time when people thought that was impossible and then 25,000. | ||
| And so he's got a pretty good understanding of the numbers that back this up about where equities go. | ||
| And so when he says it's a train wreck that the Biden plan is a train work, it is time to pay attention that we're going to look at a lot more granular on that in the days and weeks ahead to make sure that you understand how it's going to impact your personal finances, your family's finances, and the country's finances. | ||
| So stay tuned for that. | ||
| I also want to thank Mike Lindell came on this morning. | ||
| There's a lot of activity going on in him setting up this national symposium, the symposium that's around the cyber attacks, he says, that went on in the machines. | ||
| He's opening it up to one and all to come and try to tear it apart. | ||
| There's going to be a lot of developments on that in the next days and weeks ahead. | ||
| I want to thank them for being a sponsor. | ||
| Go to MyPillow.com today. | ||
| Got to type in promo code War Room. | ||
| Toppers 30% off. | ||
| Toppers, they throw in a couple of pillows. | ||
| Toppers with pillows 30% off. | ||
| This will change the way you sleep once you put one of these toppers on your mattress. | ||
| Also, they have the total sleep system, state-of-the-art, advanced. | ||
| Make sure you go to MyPillow.com. | ||
| Promo code War Room. | ||
| Also want to announce that I'm going to be on the Tim Pool Show tonight. | ||
| I think it's 8 p.m. | ||
| to 10 p.m. | ||
| Watch that. | ||
| We're going to talk a lot of economic nationalism, a lot of economic populism. | ||
| Fourth Turning, China, all of it, the Tim Pool Show. | ||
| Great show. | ||
| Really smart young man, so honored to be on there. | ||
| We're going to be leaving in a while to make sure that we can make the broadcast itself. | ||
| I've got to say, I'm so proud. | ||
| Right before the show went off today, Daily Mail, bang! | ||
| Hits with another huge story in the headlines saying, Explosive Investigative Report, National Pulse. | ||
| It's getting to be known in the world's media now, when Daily Mail is popping these stories once or twice a week, where, you know, it's National Pulse, investigative reporter Raheem Kassam, Natalie Winters, and boom, they go through it, and man, they're just taking that report, they're taking the National Pulse and just giving you a chapter and verse, so... | ||
| Rahim, we used to do this all the time at Worm Impeachment. | ||
| We haven't gotten a scalp in a while. | ||
| Because it's been kind of nice to people, and you know, we're trying to get to the facts and evidence, but I think in honor of Natalie, and Peter Daszak's been quite quiet today. | ||
| There hasn't been a lot of pushback to National Pulse, or these guys are scumbags, or these guys don't know anything. | ||
| So I think in honor of that, Rahim, I'm going to turn it over to you. | ||
| I think I'm going to turn it over to our friends in Ghana. | ||
| I think there are some... This is an honoured tradition here in the War Room. | ||
| I think we should just let it roll. | ||
| Can we go ahead and play for our friends in Ghana? | ||
|
unidentified
|
We're only looking at far-off families that include... That's classic. | |
| That was not our friends in Ghana. | ||
| Get going. | ||
| Producer camera. | ||
| Guess who's not going on the road trip today? | ||
| Producer camera is going to stay here till you get ready. | ||
| Can we have it? | ||
| Do we have it? | ||
| Do we have it? | ||
| It's not the Fox clip? | ||
| No, not the Fox clip. | ||
| Let's go ahead and I'm going to pitch back to you, Rahim. | ||
| Talk about a big build-up and no delivery. | ||
| So Raheem, go ahead and take it, we'll get to it. | ||
| Oh no, I'm out. | ||
| I'm going. | ||
| Well, look, I think one of the reasons that Mr. Darshak would have been a little quiet today is because of our follow-up story, which we'll be discussing more over the course of this show. | ||
| He's got some splainin' to do, and Mr. Fauci has some splainin' to do, as far as his, um, let's call it, uh, altercation with Senator Rand Paul in Congress had to, uh, had to... Oh, we don't actually have it. | ||
| Do we, though? | ||
| Do we? | ||
| Sure we have it. | ||
| We got it. | ||
| Okay, here we are. | ||
| Over to our friends. | ||
| Your bonus, your Christmas bonus, depends on this. | ||
| Let's have... | ||
| Let's hit it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This one goes out to Peter Daszak. | |
| This one goes out to Peter Daszak. | ||
| To the owner of Peter Daszak. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Man, we haven't played this. I love this. | |
| We used to do this all the time in impeachment. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You know, there's so many great... | |
| That's such a great position. | ||
| We've got to get... Since we're permanently banned from Twitter for Mr. Fauci, we're going to have to have a special, we're going to have to have a special odd edited video with you Fauci. | ||
| Okay guys, thank you so much. | ||
| Thank you so much Denver. | ||
| They're going to torture us now. | ||
| Now it's just going to play the whole time. | ||
| Come in Denver! | ||
|
unidentified
|
This is going to be the intro music, the outro music. | |
| They liked us so much there, they kept playing it. | ||
| I just want to tell the audience, that's something we used to do all the time at War Room Impeachment, when we would nail somebody. | ||
| And man, your hard work, you got him, and he's quiet, he's been fired by the World Health Organization, they finally understood the conflict of interest here. | ||
| It took a long time to do it, but you guys were absolutely persistent. | ||
| And for the audience out there, understand, this is the way that you crush narrative. | ||
| This is the way that you start to break this apparatus between the party of Davos and their, you know, we always said that the media here is really more powerful than the Democratic Party, right? | ||
| That they're really the opposition party. | ||
| and he softened the disaster and the disgrace of what 60 Minutes did and everybody did to come in and defend this guy. Natalie Winters and Raheem Ghassan were relentless and would not let up and of course today huge things so that's why we did the tribute. And I really want to make this clear I had no idea who Peter Daszak was before this all started, right? | ||
| There's not some grudge. | ||
| I have no interest in his personal politics. | ||
| That's not what we're doing here. | ||
| This is about reporting and it's about the truth. | ||
| It's about investigating the origins of this disease and who has covered it up along the way. | ||
| And I want to make it clear to anybody, you know, left, right, center, nothing. | ||
| You know, if you are culpable within this, and I include people in the media in this, if you have been culpable in this, we are coming after you. | ||
| We will find your emails, we will find your correspondence, we will work to make sure this never happens to humanity again. | ||
| If it's the last thing I do, We will create a list, a site with every single link, every single person, and every single story as a central resource to make sure this never can happen again. | ||
| Can we start that now with Mr. Fauci? | ||
| Because Fauci's clearly the railhead where it's got to go to. | ||
| You've got Collins, you've got Sachs. | ||
| I realize there's a lot of interim signposts along the way that we're going to play the guy. | ||
| Right. | ||
| We'll be playing that a lot. | ||
| We'll play that a lot. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| But Fauci has become so symbolic. | ||
| I mean, I don't know if we have it, but the New Yorker, the magazine cover is a disgrace. | ||
| And this is, they're trying to push back. | ||
| But they're going to own that. | ||
| They put him out today to cover with him on the, on the, on, at the beach as a lifeguard. | ||
| America's lifeguard. | ||
| Like he's guarding American lives. | ||
| That is so, not just cynical, it's so kind of distasteful they would do that, given his culpability of so much here. | ||
| And here's the thing, it's all going to be evidence-based, data-based, science-based. | ||
| We're going to get down to the absolute reality of what Fauci said when he said it. | ||
| So I think that site, if you guys understand, it's a ton of work. | ||
| But the day that you guys decide to set it up, it'll be an incredible... Well, I don't think it's a choice. | ||
| I don't think it's a choice. | ||
| Somebody has to do this. | ||
| I don't know about you, Natalie. | ||
| Don't let these two old fogies talk over you. | ||
| Don't like the boomers? | ||
| I guess you're not a boomer. | ||
| Well, I'm close. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I don't know about you, but... She comes across as nice, but she'll put the knife in. | |
| Oh, that's absolutely true. | ||
| He just asked me a question. | ||
| Metaphorically, of course. | ||
| Banner. | ||
| Let me ask you, Natalie. | ||
| I mean, I don't know if you remember the moment you came across Darshak and, you know, how you figured out that he was important in this. | ||
| You know, for me, it was really solidified. | ||
| I'd seen him, you know, realized that he was on this investigation, so on and so forth. | ||
| But, you know, what really tipped me off was when I found out that he went to, I think, was it the University of Wolverhampton or something like that, and he had You know, 116th university out of 120 universities in the United Kingdom, and he had, you know, risen to be taking all of these grants from a number of different governments. | ||
| You go, by the way, you go through the EcoHealth Alliance report, 80% of their funding comes from governments, right? | ||
| So this isn't somebody who's out there, you know, crowdfunding his own work or doing it through foundations or philanthropic entities. | ||
| No, he relies on government to do the work. | ||
| And I started scratching my head. | ||
| I was like, why would this guy like low talent person like this be? | ||
| And I went, Oh, he's a patsy. | ||
| He's a full guy. | ||
| He's there. | ||
| He's there. | ||
| He's their firewall. | ||
| And that's exactly what we found out over the last 24 hours. | ||
| That's exactly what's come true. | ||
| Well, and you talk about wanting to create a list of these names of people who've been involved, whether it was the scientific studies that created COVID-19 or the people who've been instrumental in the cover-up, but I think the fact is is that this list kind of exists and it's found on the NIAID grant database, right? | ||
| When you read these studies about SARS coronavirus manipulation in bats, In China, when you listen to the interviews of Peter Daszak and he lists his collaborators, so many of these names are already out in the open, but it's specifically people like Peter Daszak who both are compromised, but also just the mentality that the Chinese Communist Party knows that if they have scientists like Peter Daszak who they can wine and dine and let them come to their conferences and put them on stage like Peter Daszak, for example, spoke at a CGTN conference where he | ||
| Criticize President Trump and wanting to shut down scientific collaboration with China if they give them that first-class treatment They are emboldened people like Peter Doshak to cover for the Chinese Communist Party in times of crisis During a pandemic because they know that really for decades this kind of investment in them whether it's quite literal scientific grants or even just whining and dining them is | ||
| That it's a really, really high return on investment because they will run your narrative, Beijing's narrative, in mainstream media outlets, in Chinese state-run media outlets, and even the Lancet Journal, and that's exactly what we saw. | ||
| You see this falling apart, whether it's the... Remember, we've got to get to the bottom of what happened in Wuhan. | ||
| Who's responsible? | ||
| How it happened? | ||
| Who did it? | ||
| Why did people cover it up? | ||
| Why didn't we understand this at the beginning? | ||
| Why didn't they listen to people who were sitting there telling the truth back in January, February, March of last year? | ||
| Also, 3 November. | ||
| The 3 November when we get to the absolute bottom of exactly what happened in state by state by state. | ||
| Now we've got this new 1-6 project. | ||
| We've got the invasion down on the southern border. | ||
| I've never seen a news cycle like this. | ||
| It's only going to get more intense. | ||
| This summer is going to be a summer of intensity. | ||
| We're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| Also, I want to thank once more the people over at MyPillow. | ||
| Go to MyPillow.com right now. | ||
| Promo code War Room. | ||
| Okay, I'm going to be doing 10 polls this evening. | ||
| Turn it over to my two colleagues here who are going to take you home when they return in the War Room. | ||
|
unidentified
|
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. | ||
| We're only looking at viral families that include those that have got into people from animals. | ||
| So we narrow it down straight away. | ||
| Then when you get a sequence of a virus and it looks like a relative of a known nasty pathogen, just like we did with SARS, we found other coronaviruses in bats, a whole host of them. | ||
| Some of them looked very similar to SARS. | ||
| So we sequenced the spike protein, the protein that attaches to cells. | ||
| Then we, well I didn't do this work, but my colleagues in China did the work, you create pseudoparticles, you look, you insert the spike proteins from those viruses, see if they bind to human cells, and each step of this you move closer and closer to this virus could really become pathogenic in people. | ||
| So you narrow down the field, you reduce the cost, and you end up with a small number of viruses that really do look like killers. | ||
| All right, welcome back. | ||
| This is pretty low. | ||
| Welcome back to the War Room. | ||
| See, actually, I need to be sitting like this. | ||
| We've taken over. | ||
| We've taken over again, and we're grateful for your attention. | ||
| We're going to be going through some pretty detailed stuff here, because we're not done with Dasik, although Dasik might be done himself. | ||
| And here's the reason I'm not done with Dasik yet. | ||
| Nathalie, you jump in whenever you want. | ||
| But I'm not done because Dasik is leaving a trail of breadcrumbs. | ||
| And those breadcrumbs lead us directly to the other people who are culprits and culpable in this whole thing. | ||
| That's Mr. Anthony Fauci. | ||
| That's Mr. Ralph Baric. | ||
| That's the Chinese Communist Party researchers, Xi Jinping and others. | ||
| That's Mr. Francis Collins. | ||
| over at the NIH and a wealth of people around and and here's the thing if we must not let one thing happen on the back of all this is that these people retain their positions retain their budgets retain their ability to send funding here there and everywhere to do these you know quite devious experiments that they've been doing we're gonna get into one of those in just a moment you heard there | ||
| Mr Daszak talking about the killer viruses that his Chinese colleagues were creating. | ||
| We have more information on what the disgraced Dashik has been up to and specifically what others have been corroborating in the scientific community. | ||
| Others have been corroborating the people like Dashik and his team have been working on. | ||
| So, Nathalie, let's start with this story from today. | ||
| We have it up on the site. | ||
| Everybody must go to it. | ||
| Everybody must read it. | ||
| This is another one of those stories that should be on Fox. | ||
| This is another one of those stories that should be leading the Daily Mail website. | ||
| And you are the forcing function to make that happen, ladies and gentlemen. | ||
| You are the YouMail Army out there, right? | ||
| Forcing people to pay attention by posting the links, by dropping it in their feeds, by sending it to editors, sending it to other sites, sending it to your representatives. | ||
| Nathalie, why don't you take us away? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| Well, we know that all roads lead to the Wuhan Institute of Virology when we're talking about the origins of COVID-19. | ||
| But really what the question here is now, I think, is who paved those metaphorical roads? | ||
| And whether it's Google, whether it's, frankly, your tax dollars coming from Anthony Fauci, what we've uncovered at the National Pulse, and again, we've been on this for months, is that a lot of the studies that were conducted by Wuhan Institute of Virology researchers, particularly Shijun Li, Also known as Bat Lady in the American media outlets. | ||
| Well, they were conducting studies not only funded by Anthony Fauci, but the type of studies that they were conducting had to do with manipulating bat coronaviruses to better infect humans. | ||
| And that's not National Pulse conspiracy. | ||
| That's frankly a direct quote from the journal Nature. | ||
| They put up a story in 2015. | ||
| This is like a mainstream scientific journal. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Let's be very clear. | |
| This is a very establishment... | ||
| And the article was entitled, Engineered Bat Virus Stirs Debate Over Risky Research. | ||
| And I encourage people to go to the National Pulse, read the article, and read the Nature article, too. | ||
| But one of the subheadings in this article was, Lab-Made Coronavirus Related to SARS Can Infect Human Cells. | ||
| And it goes on to talk about how really this virus that researchers at the University of North Carolina, primarily Ralph Baric, alongside the Wuhan Institute of Virology's Shih-Jung Lee, had really engineered a pathway for SARS to enter the human body that hadn't previously existed. And a lot of other scientists in the community, particularly those who had been opposed to gain-of-function research years prior, really were kind of raising red flags and raising, I guess, pressing the alarm button saying, we shouldn't be doing this, this is really, | ||
| really dangerous. Was it Richard Bright, Richard E. Bright? | ||
| Yes, he was one of them. | ||
| Simon Wayne Hobson was another. | ||
| But what's really interesting, and we've obviously talked a lot about that, we've done podcasts on that, but what's really interesting about this article and why this links back to Peter Daszak is because the American scientists that they leveraged in this article to really kind of downplay the claims and concerns of people who were opposed to this risky SARS manipulation type research was none other than Peter Daszak. | ||
| I'll read the quote. | ||
| Let's see if I can find it. | ||
| Let's see. | ||
| It is, quote, but Berrick and others say the research did have benefits. | ||
| The study findings, quote, move this virus from a candidate emerging from a candidate emerging pathogen to a clear and present danger, says Peter Daszak, who co-authored the 2013 paper. | ||
| This is, of course, referencing another 2013 paper. | ||
| Of course, it was funded by Fauci. | ||
| Another co-author was the Wuhan Lab's Shih-Jung Lee, where it kind of laid the groundwork for this later study, the one in 2015 that Peter Doshak was defending. | ||
| It goes on, he continues to lay out explanation as to why gain-of-function research, which is really what's in question here, should be defended. | ||
| So again, not only do you see Peter Doshak really being kind of the poster boy for collaboration with the Chinese Communist Party on scientific research, but now he's kind of effectively becoming a poster boy for pushing for gain-of-function research, specifically creating viruses that are more lethal and transmissible for humans in Chinese Communist Party-run labs. | ||
| Let me be clear about this, because I think a lot of the audience may be hearing these same names every day and thinking that we're talking about the same stories every day. | ||
| We're not. | ||
| These are different things, different papers, different articles that we're pulling back from 2013, 2014, 2015 that a lot of people have just ignored or not bothered to look It's fascinating information because if anything, what it proves is that even if these things don't necessarily prove that, hey, this thing was created in a lab and that's how this whole thing began, this proves that what they were doing could have very easily led to a situation like this. | ||
| Now, if you ask me, my personal opinion is that it was created in the lab, and that's exactly how it got out. | ||
| But I understand that there are some people in the established media who just aren't there yet. | ||
| I was going to say that's okay. | ||
| It's not okay, because the evidence is all there, but I understand that you are lower IQ people in the mainstream media, and you need a little bit more time to get to it. | ||
| I'm thinking of Joe and Mika in the mornings, and these people who really have trouble processing this level of detailed information around these things. | ||
| So let me just be very clear about something here. | ||
| What Natalie just presented was a 2013 to 2015 series of events that show that Peter Daszak himself was out there As a Fauci-funded researcher defending other Fauci-funded studies into gain-of-function. | ||
| Now, Natalie, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Mr. Fauci say that they weren't doing gain-of-function? | ||
| He was specifically asked that by Senator Rand Paul in Congress not so long ago. | ||
| Is Natalie Winters of the perspective that Mr. Fauci has perjured himself in front of the U.S. | ||
| Congress? | ||
| Well, definitely. | ||
| And I think that this Doshak story, as you were kind of speaking about, this isn't a single smoking gun. | ||
| This is one of several smoking guns that proved that the type of research that was being conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology certainly fit that criteria. | ||
| And sometimes I've watched a lot of interviews with Ralph Baric, Peter Doshak, these American scientists who were heavily involved with the Wuhan lab. | ||
| Sometimes they're refrain as well. | ||
| Oh, well, it wasn't gain of function because some of the viruses that we manipulated they didn't actually gain any function, but it could have been and I think that's the point is that if the virus that we're seeing now, right COVID-19 kind of came from these results that didn't even necessarily result in gain of function, although I would beg to differ considering Ralph Baric and Peter Doschek's track record on telling the truth. | ||
| Just imagine how they actually conducted gain-of-function research, and this is something that we were talking about yesterday on our podcast. | ||
| A lot of this debate over gain-of-function research and whether or not to fund it has to do with the government funding it, right? | ||
| Your taxpayer dollars, specifically Anthony Fauci's NIAID. But the kind of other convergence with a lot of the reporting that we've been doing on is how private individuals and private foundations have also been funding collaborators of the Wuhan Institute of Virology and primarily those from big tech. | ||
| We saw Facebook plow six figures to Ralph Baric, who's one of the authors of the study with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. | ||
| But what Steve was talking about earlier in the show and picked up by Daily Mail and Fox was how Google has also funded Peter Doshak for over a decade. | ||
| And even a study in 2018 where they talk about a potential pandemic emerging from a wet market in China. | ||
| Well, that sounds pretty familiar. | ||
| to the narrative that they're spinning now. | ||
| So there is a lot of money going into this effort, and make no mistake, as Zuckerberg has been plowing cash into election infrastructure, plowing cash into schools, plowing cash to promote critical race theory, all these crazy left-wing agendas, I think that he's also going to continue, not start, but continue plowing cash into these researchers who have very, very compromising and suspect ties to the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| Let's go back to those emails and the and the cash coming from from Anthony's friend, Mark, right? | ||
| Anthony's friend, Mark. | ||
| That's how he describes Mark Zuckerberg. | ||
| He refers to him on first name terms, Mr. Fauci, that is, and he said that in his Sway interview a number of times on the podcast yesterday morning. | ||
| But he's talking specifically about these emails. | ||
| And we referenced this this morning. | ||
| So let's let's just give the detail on this. | ||
| Fauci claimed in that interview that he has quote no control over the emails that were released and as a result people were making up conspiracy theories losing context he was upset and doing a big sad because people were calling him Hitler and a murderer and all of this stuff I mean frankly they've done it for his entire career he should be Very well used to it by now. | ||
| And he deserves every pejorative in that sense. | ||
| But it turns out that was another whopping lie, Natalie. | ||
| So why don't you walk the audience through just you can start it now. | ||
| We may go over the break here. | ||
| But please tell us illuminate us as to the nature of Fauci's comments on the podcast surrounding his emails. | ||
| Well, you do a pretty good impression. | ||
| But I'll read the quote in my voice. | ||
| But what Fauci says when he's pressed on these emails by Kara Swisher, specifically the one that he exchanged with Mark Zuckerberg, he says, well, I don't know who redacted that. | ||
| When people ask for my emails, I don't look through my emails and say, okay, I'll give you this one and redact this. | ||
| It's completely out of my control. | ||
| Maybe there's a few Fauci squeaks in there that I missed. | ||
|
unidentified
|
For those who missed the Fauci squeak, it's a thing. | |
| But that's not the case. | ||
| It's another... I don't even think it's a flip-flop. | ||
| I think it's just a total lie coming from Anthony Fauci. | ||
| Yeah, it's our flip-flop. | ||
| In fact, I'll let people into a little bit of my editing process. | ||
| In your copy, you originally had the word flip-flop and I changed it to lie. | ||
| I like the alliteration. | ||
| It's a lovely alliteration, but it's a lie. | ||
| It's a total lie. | ||
| What he does here is he claims that he has no control over the emails that are released Meanwhile, Nasty, what did the HHS Department of Rules state? | ||
| yes in the department of health and human services kind of fact-checked fauci a few months back because one of the rationales that this agency yeah that the agency gave as to why they had to basically slow roll of freedom of information act request until after the election was that doctor vouchers are mister fauci had to review every single email before it was released to the public and i quote h h s also alleged that fauci must personally review each one of his emails | ||
| they are so this is now obviously a provable i've remained the fauci saying he had no control over what was released and remember is also uh... only i think a few weeks ago where he said he quote didn't even remember his email with mark zuckerberg when he was criticizing mark my uh... marshall blackburn uh... for creating a video so total i've told what's what's what's I mean, this is just, and it's another brazen lie, and these are lies that don't need to be told, which is even more concerning. | ||
| What has this guy lied about for the last 30 years in his position? | ||
| Why is he lying like this on repeat? | ||
| Is he a sociopath, and does he need to see a real doctor very, very quickly about that ailment? | ||
| We'll be back. | ||
| Peter Dasher? | ||
| That's not a real doctor. | ||
| We'll be back in just a moment. | ||
|
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. | ||
| Our organization's been working in China, in collaboration with Chinese scientists in the government of China, For over 15 years, supported by federal funding from the US and federal funding from China. | ||
| And it's true global cooperation. | ||
| We work on emerging diseases ever since the SARS virus emerged in China. | ||
| Natalie, there's Daszak again implicating himself once again, implicating everyone else around him, by the way. | ||
| Daszak really is the key that unpicks the lock on so many of these people. | ||
| You know, they've tried to put this fake divide up between all of these people and the Chinese Communist Party, but there it is, in his own voice, saying, hey, it's not just the US government, it's not just Mr. Fauci funding us, it's also the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| There is a convergence of bureaucratic Marxist evil going on in the world, and Dashik just laid it out. | ||
| And it's very fitting that he made those remarks in 2018 while he was speaking at a conference sponsored by none other than China Global Television Network, which is of course a state-run broadcaster, really at the tip of the spear in terms of the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| media and propaganda operations, so it's no surprise that he would be speaking, really headlining their conference, and I'm surprised that he also hasn't made rounds on Chinese state-run media yet to kind of run cover for what happened with the Lancet Journal, since he likes to do that a lot. | ||
| But what's really, I think, the buried lead from that clip is that it totally undermines and really disproves a statement that Dostoevsky made yesterday. | ||
| This is, of course, the correction, merely the mea culpa, I would say, that the Lancet Journal issued really divulging all of Peter Daszak's conflicts of interest. | ||
| And I'll read you a specific quote from Peter Daszak. | ||
| Neither Peter Daszak nor EcoHealth Alliance have received funding from the People's Republic of China. | ||
| But I'm pretty sure in that clip that we just played, he admits quite literally to, quote, receiving federal funding from China. | ||
| In other words, the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| And that's no surprise as someone who's read the dozens of research grants that EcoHealth Alliance has received, funded by your taxpayer dollars. | ||
| Quite often, not only are there Chinese Communist Party-linked researchers, I'm of course talking about Sher Jung Lee and other people from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but a lot of times this research was funded by an organization called the Natural National Science Foundation of China. | ||
| And this dovetails with a report that we put up about two or three days ago detailing this organization's ties to the Chinese Communist Party's military. | ||
| Really for decades, they have funded research either alongside the People's Liberation Army or funded research being carried out by the People's Liberation Army. | ||
| And not just military-linked researchers, even the artillery academy of the People's Liberation Army, you see this organization funding. | ||
| But what's really interesting, and where this all ties back to Fauci, is that in 2010, The National Institutes of Health, under the leadership of Francis Collins, actually signed a memorandum of understanding with this military-linked foundation in China. | ||
| And believe it or not, in 2011, the year after this agreement was inked, Fauci's deputy, Hugh Auchincloss, actually visited Beijing, led a 34-person delegation, and they expanded the terms of this agreement to boost collaboration, And fund more studies. | ||
| I'm curious if any of the studies at the Wuhan Institute of Virology fell under the purview of this memorandum of understanding. | ||
| So, you know, really what you're seeing there is Peter Daszak is kind of a symptom of a broader problem, and that is of course, as you guys talk about almost every day, the complete and utter compromise of the American scientific establishment | ||
| By the Chinese Communist Party, and Peter Daszak really is, I think, a not so glorious example of that, and particularly, I think, the dangers of it, because you see that despite Peter Daszak's insistence, and in that clip that you play, I think it was trimmed out, but he talks about why collaboration with the Chinese Communist Party on scientific research is so important, and he talks about how it increases transparency, and how we need to partner with the Chinese government. | ||
| But what's the point of partnering with the Chinese Communist Party, might I add, at taxpayer expense, if when it comes to a time of crisis, when it comes to a global pandemic, you can't get any transparency from them? | ||
| And I think it is a very, very fitting end, or I guess maybe we're in the middle, to this whole saga where the fact that the 16,000 bat coronavirus samples that Peter Daszak collected, which in his own words, he admits that he collected with taxpayer expense, | ||
| Well, those were disappeared from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, so when the World Health Organization team of COVID-19 investigators visited trying to get to the bottom of COVID-19, they were told that they couldn't look at these virus samples, because not only did Peter Daszak assure them that they didn't need to, but they had been disappeared by, likely, the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| Well, we're short on time, coming up to the end here, Natalie. | ||
| Anything else to add before I do a big plug for your work at the National Pulse? | ||
| Um, you can find me on Twitter, at Natalie G. Winters. | ||
| I'm getting better at this. | ||
| Yeah, that is, you get slightly better in terms of remembering, but you're still bad in the sense that you're only on Twitter. | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| And Facebook. | ||
| What, they're still bad? | ||
| And, I realize, I'm also on Instagram, but I never share it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Still bad! | |
| Natalie G. Winters! | ||
| We'll get her on Gab at some point. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And sometimes Discord, the National Pulse chat channel. | |
| Yeah. | ||
| Okay, so it's Natalie G. Winters on all of the establishment social media channels. | ||
| We'll get you on a non-establishment media one soon. | ||
| That is my pledge to you, the audience. | ||
| And I'm sure Steve would not mind me doing this, but I do want to give a plug For the National Pulse's membership scheme, you know, we are not funded by any big corporate, no major foundation, no major grants. | ||
| Every single penny that we make comes from our audience. | ||
| You can go to, it's real simple, fundrealnews.com. | ||
| Fundrealnews.com. | ||
| literally just from $5 a month there are plans or there are up to $2,500 plans for people who want to really chip in and help our work. It costs money to do all of these things. We're not getting rich over here. | ||
| We plow everything and every waking minute quite frankly into this into this work and I just implore you if you want to support it go to fundrealnews.com and support our work. | ||
| You get all sorts of cool things as well. | ||
| Access to me and Natalie in our private Discord chat channel. | ||
| I'm in there every day. | ||
| Just hundreds of cool people in there, day in day out, help us with research and all that kind of stuff. | ||
| And just have a great time. | ||
| I did a little town hall, an impromptu town hall in there last night. | ||
| I like to jump in and give a couple of behind the scenes and some gossipy stuff and how the sausages get made over here. | ||
| So that's funrealnews.com. | ||
| And the last thing I have to say, quite frankly, is England won! | ||
| And we're through to the next round in Euro 2020, even though it's 2021. | ||
| It's Euro 2020 still, and I'm just ecstatic about that. | ||
| Football's coming home. | ||
| Don't you agree, Natalie? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I don't have a clue. | ||
| Well, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for tuning in. | ||
| Make sure you tune in to Steve Bannon on Tim Pool later on today. | ||
| I think it's about 8pm today, and we'll see you again bright and early tomorrow morning here in the War Room. | ||
| Have a great evening. |
Export Selection