All Episodes
Previous Next
July 6, 2021 - Bannon's War Room
48:29
Episode 1,075 – Fact Checker Gets War Room Struggle SessionEpisode 1,075 – Fact Checker Gets War Room Struggle Session
Participants
Main voices
r
raheem kassam
07:20
s
steve bannon
13:35
Appearances
n
natalie winters
02:37
Clips
a
anthony fauci
00:06
j
jack posobiec
00:32
j
joe biden
00:05
| Copy link to current segment

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.
anthony fauci ▲ ● ▼
We have to prepare for the worst, always, because if you don't, and the worst happens.
unidentified
War Room.
Pandemic.
Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Okay, now with almost 65 million downloads on the podcast, of course, we're distributed everywhere on Real America's Voice, on cable, on satellite.
I want to thank Samsung TV Plus, the new audience brought in by Real America's Voice, Channel 1029.
I want to welcome everybody there, Coach Roku, Pluto, We're up in Telegram, Rumble, all of it.
So I want to thank everybody.
Also now, I think starting today, we're on Getter.
Be tomorrow, we'll be on Getter.
So I want to thank everybody.
Of course, Real America's Voice, John Frederick's Radio Network.
Really want to thank G News and GTV for doing the simulcast in Mandarin and then later the day blowing it through the firewall.
So I want to thank everybody at Social for the distribution.
We're supposed to have Alan Dukes.
We're having a slight technical problem.
As soon as we get Alan hooked up, we will go to him.
Jack, Natalie brought up a good point, and this is why this article on human events is so important, and everybody needs not just to read it, you need to share it.
There used to be this concept or this construct of elite capture, right?
There was a great book came out called Hidden Hand by Clive Hamilton, one of the great investigative reporters in Australia that did the Silent invasion about Australia what the Chinese Communist Party did to kind of get in there take over their political system and how the Aussies had to fight back then he brought it out to the United Kingdom and to the West and particularly the United States about the influence and the elite capture of the Chinese Communist Party and how Natalie lays out united front.
It's a major part of their three types of warfare Right?
But your story takes it to the next level and I think this is how people, this is the framework that you need to think about it now and so many things become evident, right?
And that is not elite capture anymore, it's elite merger.
What happened after Tiananmen and all those promises that because of our system, a system of free market capitalism and democracy and the values of the Judeo-Christian West, that we were going to change the revolutionary Transnational criminal organization of the Chinese Communist Party to our values in our way a way of managing States and managing institutions the exact opposite happened that in fact our institutions and particularly the people in power saw a model that that work for them
And, you know, once every now and again they say the quiet part out loud.
A couple of years ago, Tom Friedman, remember he wrote that famous article, he says, just for a day, he was, you know, he's in Beijing talking to a cab driver like he always does.
He said, just for a day, just for a day, I'd like to have the model of the Chinese Communist Party because we take care of climate change, we do all this.
Your piece It's so important because we have to start thinking about this differently.
Natalie Winters said it last segment.
It's not elite capture.
It's now elite merger.
I want you to walk us through your piece, Mr. Jack Posobiec.
unidentified
Steve, now this piece is very important.
It's pinned at the top of humanevents.com.
Everybody should go read it and share it if you care about your country, if you care about what's going on.
And if you're asking yourselves the question of, because I was asked this all the time before I wrote this, they said, Jack, A lot of people in the US, they say, we get it, we get CCP, we get that you're, you were a Mandarin guy, you lived there, you worked at the American Chamber of Commerce, et cetera, whatever, right?
There's so many problems here at home, why are you talking about China all the time?
And this is the piece that explains the connection, right?
We've finally gone through and found the nefarious roots of how this came to pass.
And what it is, it's an axis of the elites, right?
The 1% in the West and the CCP in China, this is the culmination, this view of the past 15 years of my life, what I've seen when I was living and working in China in international business, when I was in the military and the intelligence community, looking at how our country interacted with China, primarily through the Obama administration, when I was in and seeing how we would make these sort of, uh, in poultry gestures towards, you know, please stop building the islands.
We're going to, Drive a naval vessel past them and really rattle our sabers, but they would continue to build the islands.
We would say, please stop building that aircraft carrier.
They would continue to build their aircraft carrier.
Please stop restricting trade and everything with human rights, etc, etc.
jack posobiec ▲ ● ▼
And I realized that as this kept going on, when we would send congressional delegations to Shanghai and to the planning committee they have there, right in downtown Shanghai, the Planning Committee Museum, they would learn that through the power of the CCP model, And that you hear everybody from Thomas Friedman now to Charlie Munger saying this just last week.
unidentified
They say, you know, if we could just have that model and have that power, we could get done everything we want done.
We could shut down the banking of the deplorables and the little guy.
We could shut down the ape army and this economic populism.
We could shut down all of these things that we don't want so that we in power could then have the decision.
What happened was instead of Infecting China with these ideals of democracy, of liberalism, of a Judeo-Christian West and our values, right?
This was part and parcel, this is sort of part of the conversation as to the handover of Hong Kong, right?
They would say, well, if Hong Kong goes back to China just in a sovereign way, 50 years, right?
They're going to show this model, this system to the rest of China, and they're going to want to embrace it.
They're going to break away from the CCP.
And you see a little of that, right?
A little of that had happened before in 1989, Tiananmen Square.
No, no.
The momentum all rolled the other way.
The elites were wrong, or perhaps this is what they wanted in the first place.
They got a taste of the Chinese power of authoritarianism through the CCP.
And they said, you know what?
That's what we want to set up now.
So you see this in Silicon Valley.
You see this in Wall Street.
You see it in Washington DC, City of London, etc.
This is the model they want and they have now set up the axis of the elites between the 1% in the West and the CCP in China, which if you look at the numbers about 92 million, that's actually less than 1% of the Chinese population, 1.4 billion.
So it's the 1% I want to go back to the third week of January of 2017.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
There were two speeches given, both that got global coverage.
One that was the front page of the Economist, I believe the front page of the Financial Times of London.
It was on the 18th of January, 2017, given in Davos by President Xi.
And he basically made this speech and talked about globalization, talked about the network effect of globalization.
He talked about the wonders of globalization.
And he basically said the only problem we have out there is these populists.
The problem we've got out there is these nationalists.
They're the guys, they're the bad guys, they're the xenophobes, they're going to break this up.
Standing ovation.
And Davos man couldn't get enough of it.
The party at Davos hailed him as really the leader.
A couple days later, Donald Trump, in his inaugural address, gave the American Carnage speech, which was really a defense of the Westphalian system, which the West has been built on, what, for 300 years?
This idea of the nation-states and nation-states working together.
So it was Trump versus Xi at the very railhead of this, intellectually.
And the party of Davos, the 1%, absolutely embraced Xi's vision of globalization, further globalization.
Here's the key.
All of the people there, the bankers, the lawyers, the accountants, all the media experts from around the world, all the media goes to Davos for this kind of winter fest.
You have all the hedge fund guys, all the commercial bankers, all the top deal lawyers.
All of their business is one business.
That's the information business.
They deal in the information business.
Every one of those people Everybody knew about the Underground House Christians and the Underground Catholic Church.
They understood about the suppression of the Tiananmen Square Democracy Movement.
Tibetan Buddhists and the followers of the Dalai Lama.
Everybody knew about the underground house Christians in the underground Catholic Church. They understood about the suppression of the Tiananmen Square democracy movement.
They understood the brutal dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party on their people as they hailed Xi at that speech on 18 January, I believe it was, 2017, two or three days before President Trump's inauguration.
They knew all of it.
And they didn't care.
They don't care.
That's not their issue.
They don't care about any of that.
And they quite frankly don't care about any of it globally.
They detest Lao-Bai Jing, old hundred names.
They detest the deplorables.
You just get in the way, right?
All you are is supposed to be units of consumption and production and nothing else.
You have no rights.
They don't care what you think.
And so the party at Davos Rahim, you led the Brexit movement that got Britain its sovereignty.
And here's the beauty of the Brexit movement, which was a precedent to the Trump movement, is that 20% of Britons today, as they're polled, say, knowing what I know now and seeing all the lies that were told to me, I would support Nigel Farage.
We would do it again.
Rahim Ghassan, you've seen the party of Davos up close and personal.
Your thoughts about this?
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
That's 20% of the people who voted to remain would now flip, and I think it's far more than that if you really get down to it.
Look at how strange.
I really thought Brexit was about the strangest time in British politics, at least in a modern sense, but it's becoming even weirder.
At the moment you've got George Galloway this you know Marxist firebrand now running on a on a more nationalist ticket Up in up in special elections, and this is what happens you let's talk about let's talk about the party of Davos Let's talk about the the political elite in the United Kingdom at the moment
You've got Boris Johnson, who Dominic Cummings, you know, his Svengali, has said over the last 24 hours that Boris Johnson mentioned many times that he should never be Prime Minister, that he can't believe that Britain made him the Prime Minister and that he doesn't want to do the job.
Now, of course, we know that Dominic Cummings has an axe to grind there, but he's not one to make up stories.
The political elites are now so bothered with kind of fighting amongst themselves and bickering at the very top levels over, you know, who gets what of the spoils of the decline of Britain, that they forget that there's a movement out there and it may be Marxist in the form of George Galloway, it may be Libertarian in the form of some of these other, you know, Reclaim Party and all these that are being... Lawrence Fox and these guys that are coming about.
It may be Nationalist in the Brexit Party and the Reform Party sense.
And it may be conservative in the grassroots of the Conservative Party that is now trying to find its feet once again, having been led by David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson over the course of the last decade plus.
I think you're seeing a complacency now, especially if you look at the G7, what we saw at the G7, what the world saw about the G7.
You know, you've got Boris Johnson up there going, ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-ba, build back better and ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-ba, build back more feminist, you know, and you're seeing People just having had it up to their eyebrows with these people, with their lack of concern with what's going on.
Most people don't even realise there were thousands upon thousands upon thousands of people out on the streets protesting against lockdowns in the United Kingdom just last weekend.
The videos don't get televised.
The coverage doesn't get put on television.
Even GB News, you know, the supposedly new un-woke station, didn't bother to cover it.
There is a... and it's just a pressure valve, right?
They're pretending, yeah, we're going to give you the news and we're going to do things.
Listen, you've got a real problem in your hands because what's going to happen now is everyone's going to decide, just like they're deciding in France, that hey, maybe the democratic process ain't the right one for me.
That's a very dangerous situation.
It's not a situation any of us want to end up in.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
I want to go to real quick.
By the way, what you just said is the managed decline.
That's why Trump was elected President in 16.
The meta-narrative was the managed decline of our country by the elites that didn't care.
They're making as much money on the way down as they made on the way up.
And you can see that by the concentration of wealth.
You see this by the top 1%.
And even let's add in the top 3% how they're getting wealthier than absolutely imaginable as the populace, the working class and the middle class get crushed.
Natalie, real quickly to you.
You break these stories all the time.
But it looks like when you break the stories and you cite the references, I sit there and go, she's doing an amazing job, but this stuff's kind of sitting out there.
Does it stun you all the time that just no one ever just goes and looks at this stuff and it's just in broad daylight?
There's no conspiracies.
There's not a conspiracy, but there are no coincidences.
Does it shock you that you just find this material out there?
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼
Honestly, it doesn't.
There's a quote from Sun Tzu that the CCP's military uses quite heavily in their military code and strategy, and it's quote, the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.
And of course, you could interpret that as getting, you know, our military to adopt critical race theory or just compromising and merging with the elite so they push the lines of the Chinese Communist Party.
But at the point in which You know, these people who have power and can really hold the Chinese Communist Party in check, right?
Of course, I'm talking about the media.
When they've been so bought off by the Chinese Communist Party through these various influence operations, they're obviously not going to report on it.
I think the first time I was on War Room ever, I said there was an axis of evil that exists between our American elites, the Chinese Communist Party, and the mainstream media, and that's how they let them get away with it, because they'll never report on it.
So it takes someone like me, and frankly, I'll say the reason why Thomas Zimmerman can get off and work in the Biden regime is because everybody who's vetting him, they probably want to go work at a lobbying firm that works with the Chinese Communist Party after they leave.
At the National Pulse, I don't ever want to lobby for the Chinese Communist Party, so I'm happy to call them out and I'll keep doing it.
unidentified
Amen.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
By the way, when Natalie Winters came on and said that, she was 19 years old and a sophomore at the University of Chicago.
Short commercial break.
Alan Dukes will join us next.
unidentified
War Room.
Pandemic.
With Stephen K. Banham.
The epidemic is a demon and we cannot let this demon hide.
War Room.
Pandemic.
Here's your host, Stephen K. Banham.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Okay, welcome back to the War Room.
We now have someone we've wanted to have on the show for a long time.
It's Mike Lindell's best buddy, Alan Dukes.
Alan, you're an Army veteran, you're airborne, you're the founder or co-founder of Lead Stories.
Tell our audience, because they may not be familiar, but I want to put the link up there.
Tell us a little bit about your background, but particularly Lead Stories.
Why did you co-found it, and what is it an attempt to do?
unidentified
I co founded Lead Stories in 2015 after 26 years at CNN, which earns me a lot of grief from some of your friends, I suppose my long career at CNN.
But let me say that was the CNN that Ted Turner started from the 80s and the 90s.
And not quite the same animal as it is now.
I left there in 2014.
I joined a company called AMI.
Which you probably know some of those folks.
As a national correspondent for MI, working for Dylan Howard, and well, you know those guys.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
But hang on for a second, let me just ask you a question, particularly about CNN, for a particular lot of news junkies that remember what CNN was like when it first started in those first years.
When you say it's not the CNN, I worked at the CNN at Ted Turner, not the CNN today.
What do you mean by that?
unidentified
Well, while there may be a handful of people still around, I mean, we did pretty straight news back in the 80s and the 90s and the aughts, as they say.
And it started changing.
In fact, this is why I started Lead Stories.
They moved me out to Los Angeles.
I've been covering a lot of domestic terrorism, that sort of thing.
Then they moved me out to Los Angeles to cover celebrity terrorism, if you will, out here in Hollywood.
And, you know, Justin Bieber, Lindsay Lohan, that sort of thing.
So a lot of Chris Brown, and you know how Los Angeles is different from Atlanta.
But so I did that for about six years.
But over the period of that six years, what was happening was social platforms were changing the way that we did our jobs at CNN.
I got a call one day that said, Alan, we need to change the writing style here.
Because I was sort of cross platform, you would see my stories on digital, you might occasionally see my face on TV.
But there was an evolution going on, almost a revolution, in the way that you had to have a voice.
You had to change your voice.
Not the old AP style that I grew up on from the 70s onward.
And I saw that changing and realized it was, you know, everybody in search of the clicks from Google search or Facebook or Twitter at the time.
And I was thinking, what does that mean to journalism?
Where does it go?
And then I've got a little technology background.
And so I started thinking about what we could do.
So I found a partner, who is a lawyer, a national lawyer.
In Colorado, we've had a little bit of money.
I said, let's start this thing.
And so then we found our partner in our technology partner.
Who happened to be in Belgium, who had been already working the problem, how do you get your arms around what's happening on social platforms with the media?
And he had already invented this thing called the Trendalyzer, which is one of the things that we licensed to clients around the world.
And the whole idea was just because it's trending doesn't mean it's true.
The idea of detecting the trends in social platforms, but social platforms have Really changed journalism and CNN.
I remember sitting next to Jeff Zucker at an employee meeting, probably 2013, where he was saying, we've got to change.
We're going to have to do this and this and this.
And everybody was very apprehensive, including me, about where that led.
Well, I think it led to less straight news coverage and more of the talking heads and more of the attitudes.
When I was The Ted Turner days, we would be, there was a lot of pressure on us not to be seen taking a side.
We couldn't even take a side on what time of the day it was.
We couldn't ever say today or tomorrow because globally there was no today.
Everything was today, right?
We couldn't say the word foreign.
That was the F word at CNN during the Turner days.
That's how neutral we had to be because what was foreign, right?
It was all a matter of perspective.
So we had to put our own perspective out of the way.
That's completely changed now.
And so that was really a large part of why I wanted to leave CNN and create something different to analyze and watch what was happening with the media.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Let me ask you, because you say about trending, when Zucker came in, a lot of people thought he was just going to make it more celebrity oriented, like he had made the Today Show.
But you're saying that he actually, that you had to have more of a perspective just in the strength of his coverage.
unidentified
Yeah.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
You had to have a voice, which means a perspective.
And by the way, the audience should know there's a saying for people that do the news online about trending versus something that's real.
What I found is too good to check, right?
It's too good to check.
So a lot of people just put it up there and it trends.
Do you focus on mainstream media?
Do you focus on... because you know when I announced that to the team that you were coming on, of course my colleagues Raheem Kassam and Jack Masovic's heads immediately blew up.
Do you focus on news stories from mainstream media from smaller sites?
I mean, how do you guys triage what to analyze?
unidentified
It's evolved.
And yes, I have fact-checked CNN.
I can give you an exact example.
If you recall, in October of 2019, when there was the whole controversy about Hillary Clinton and what she said on a podcast about the Congresswoman from Hawaii, from Maui.
CNN, I thought, misreported that.
We flagged them.
They didn't like it.
But no, and on other occasions, we flag mainstream media all the time.
The thing about the mainstream media, when we flag them, they're very quick to make a correction.
The other thing is that the majority, it seems now, of what gets flagged on Facebook, it's not media.
It's not really journalism.
It's not National Pulse.
It's the memes.
The meme is the thing now.
We probably flag more memes because, just almost by definition, a meme is missing some context.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Tell us a meme versus a news story.
A meme versus something natural.
A Natalie Winters story.
unidentified
A meme is just an image that someone posts that may be funny, generally intended to be funny in a lot of cases, but actually, to use a word, it's kind of been weaponized.
The meme is something that you can create in about 15 seconds and share it And it will go viral very, very quickly.
And that seems to be the largest percentage.
I can tell you when we started as Facebook third party fact checkers three years ago, it was more articles we were flagging.
We don't flag that many articles anymore.
It's mostly individual posts or memes that have gone viral.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Let me ask you before we get to the, and I know the guy's got a bunch of questions on the Facebook there, but Mike Lindell.
Mike Lindell has obviously become a hero to the Patriot movement.
I mean, here's a guy who puts his business online, and Mike comes on, and of course he's a character, right?
Kind of larger than life.
But I don't think we have a show, I don't think we do a show that he's not calling out Alan Dukes.
And Alan Dukes called me and he said this, what is it, why have you focused on a guy like in the populist movement, the nationalist movement, in this kind of traditionalist movement, the Trump or the MAGA movement, whatever you call it.
Mike Lindell is obviously a major player, right? But why have you decided to focus on him? Because you wouldn't think that he's, you know, a CNN or National Pulse or Jack Masobic at human events, or are you saying he's a weaponized meme? Is that why you've that's why you focused on it?
unidentified
Well, no, we first of all, we don't focus on Mike Lindell, but I do live rent free in Mike's head.
I have to say, Steve, you and I have common friends, okay.
You and I have common threads, okay?
I've got all kinds of friends, but I would love to be Mike Lindell's friend in another time.
I really like Mike.
And Mike knows that because we have a vigorous text message exchange.
And Mike is like that friend who has a problem and is gullible and is being taken on Somebody's using them and you want to do an intervention.
Now is no if I say that he was a crack addict, that's that's not slander.
That's not liable because he wrote a whole book about it.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Yeah.
unidentified
Mike is a patriot.
Mike is passionate about the country.
I consider I relate to that in mind.
But my problem is I feel that he's being taken advantage of by some people who are selling him A bag of crap.
He won't really admit who is selling it to him.
But we know.
And if you go to our website, leadstories.com, you'll see there's one one story called attention, Mike Lindell, but you might want to know about the data used in this in your stolen election claims.
We've tracked it down.
And the source of these, this data that he has is a source that was called fraudulent by the Gateway Pundit.
And you know the Gateway Pundit.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Hang on, I just wanna make sure, you're saying, let's just get it out there, you're saying, I think what you're saying, correct me if I'm wrong, that the Dennis Montgomery, Mary Fanny... Dennis, but Mike denies, he won't acknowledge it's Dennis.
Okay, but this is the point I want to get to.
You're open, and Mike has said, and I just want to know if this claim you think is false or not.
Mike has said, hey, I'm going to put forward all my data, all my experts.
I'm now going to do it in Sioux Falls, South Dakota on the 10th, 11th, and 12th.
But he would take people that have come earlier.
I think he would take you and a team.
unidentified
Are you open?
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
I would go earlier.
unidentified
I would go today.
Listen, well, my wife just chimed in.
She doesn't want me to go today.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
But hang on, if we get set up that Alan Dukes would have cyber security experts that meet whatever this benchmark is... Yes, we would do it!
I'm not an expert.
Either am I. I'm far from it. That's why I stay away from the machines. I say, look, I know the guys are experts. But here's, Mike's gonna come in at five o'clock tonight. And but you would say lead stories, you would put together a team. Obviously, some we would sign people would sign off on it, but lead stories would come in and you would go through all the analysis and everything of Mike Lindell and then and then opine to it.
Because your contention is that it's tied to Dennis Montgomery or some of these more controversial figures in the IC community.
Let's take a short commercial break.
Alan, if you'd just hang on for a few minutes.
I want to come back.
I know guys want to talk about Facebook.
We want to talk more about Mike Lindell and the election of 3 November 2020.
Alan Dukes from Lead Stories joins us.
We'll 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.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Okay, we have Alan Dukes from Livestore.
He's committed to sit down, pull together a team.
He'll be signed off and to go through with Mike Lindell.
This is Mike Lindell's offer to go through all his data, all his analysis, and actually do it pre-August 10th, 11th, and the 12th.
And Mike's going to be out in Sioux Falls.
We're going to be covering that non-stop.
Mike's going to be on the show today.
He'll respond to Alan Dukes.
Alan, the War Room Posse is not exactly totally excited about the direction of this interview.
So I want to talk to Raheem and then Jack.
I don't understand.
I think the tell was not your airborne service in the Army.
I think it was when he said CNN used to be hard news.
I think that triggered him right there.
But let's go to Rahim.
I know you've got a bunch of questions, particularly about the Facebook situation.
And as you know, Alan, we're not huge fans of Zuckerberg and the team at Facebook.
We think it's oppressed.
That's where we're all over in ghetto right now.
So Rahim, why don't you go ahead and take it away, sir.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Well, Alan, thank you for joining us.
The last time we spoke, I think, was probably one of the most bizarre conversations I've ever had, but let's try and have a sort of more sophisticated one this time.
I think it's all well and good that you can pull up from two years ago a CNN fact check that you made, but I want to ask some particular questions about the way you kind of weigh different things up, and you got into some of that in the last segment with Steve, but I think the first question a lot of people want to ask, you talk about doing things the old-school way, right, or at least you came from the old-school CNN.
unidentified
Yes.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
But you're not really a fact-checker so much as you are a censor.
And back in the day, what we would do is if somebody misreported something, somebody else would report it correctly.
But you report it in your eyes correctly on your site, and that's all well and good.
I'm fully in favor of you being able to do that.
What I don't understand, Alan, and what I hope you can explain to me, is where you find the moral impetus to shut down things from your perspective on Facebook, for instance, that we write.
And I'll give you a recent example.
Dr. Ralph Baric at UNC Chapel Hill and Natalie Winters found this incredible slideshow that he put together talking about how you can make money during the pandemic.
Now, Leeds Stories, and I think it was actually authored by yourself, took umbrage with the fact that we use the word scheming in the headline.
But scheming is an editorial turn of phrase and we also included the full clip, the full link to the full video of him, as well as a shortened version of him presenting that one slide in particular Where he talks about making money.
So, Alan, where do you get off telling me what I can put in my headlines?
unidentified
Well, I don't.
You can put anything in your headline that you want.
However, if you want to share it on the Facebook platform, my company has been contracted by Facebook in order to make an assessment through which they could put a label on it.
Was your content taken off of Facebook?
Isn't it still there and available for anybody to read?
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
It has one of your Orwellian walls in front of it.
unidentified
Well, I don't know George Orwell.
I don't think he's created that.
You just have to click it and it removes that label and you can see it, right?
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Why should an American citizen have to bypass a filter from you to read a news story on a news website?
unidentified
Because they need, we're adding additional information.
We're not censoring.
Censoring is when you take something down.
Not, that's not what's happening here.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Your story... You've delivered several flags onto the National Post's page and then had a 30-day suspension on that page.
Is that censorship or not?
unidentified
It's not censorship.
I talked with Dr. Baric.
I now have his cell phone.
I can call him and he can ask me if he wants to.
But we did not censor that.
Your story Took it out of context and misinterpreted what was going on.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
According to who?
unidentified
That's what we did.
What did we rate that?
Did we rate that missing context?
Is that what we did?
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
I believe so.
So according to who?
unidentified
Missing context doesn't put a label over it.
Missing context puts a little link at the bottom.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
But Alan, according to who?
According to who?
unidentified
Yeah, I just said that.
That missing context puts... According to you?
If you go to your story, And let's go to the story.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
We understand the technicals.
We understand the technicalities of it.
According to who is it missing context?
According to who?
unidentified
According to our staff, we have two copy editors who go through it.
We have a reporter who researches it and writes it.
And it goes through about five levels of discussion.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
But Alan, just for the audience, what percentage of your staff have given money to the Democratic Party or Democratic Party candidates?
unidentified
Oh, that's easy.
Zero.
You did a story back in June.
Oh, you did a story back in June that found one of our writers, who was a part-time writer, had donated, I think, $23 to Bernie Sanders a year earlier or something like that, which we didn't know about.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Anthony, what percentage of Lead Story staff have given to Democratic parties?
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼
I actually believe it's 100%, and you're actually looking at about a five-figure number.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
When have I ever- I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about your staff, Alan.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼
I'm actually talking about your co-founder, Perry Sanders, who donated $3,700 to Hillary Clinton's campaign and $4,000 to Obama's 2008 campaign.
unidentified
And how about $10,000 to Republican Canada in Colorado?
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
That was in a non-partisan race, Alan.
unidentified
Let me answer.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Go ahead, Alan.
unidentified
Perry is not a Democrat.
He's not a Republican.
Perry is basically Anti-hypocrisy, that is his thing.
And he goes by the candidate, not by the party.
He's not really politically active, but he's a fairly well-to-do businessman in Colorado.
And he's not on my staff.
He is one of the people who had money helping us start this thing in 2015.
And he's not on the staff.
He's not involved in our operations as such.
The other partner Is a Republican in Florida, by the way.
Didn't mention him.
And then it's me.
And you will not even, you will not find any Democratic registration or contributions on my, in my past.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Alan, for everybody to see, we're going to put this back up on our site so people can see it.
We've gone through the staff here.
You've had your say on that.
You disagree with our reporting.
You can take it up with the Federal Elections Commission website because that's where we've gone through to get all that reporting.
Let me just finally ask you this.
This is my last question before I hand over to Jack Posobiec on this.
How much do you get paid by what the US State Department called a mouthpiece for the Chinese Communist Party?
That would be bite dance.
unidentified
How much do you get paid?
You have a contract?
You have a contract with what the US State Department called a mouthpiece for the Chinese Communist Party?
with Mike Dance in order to consult them on misinformation on their platform.
You know, we have a contract with them. It's on our website.
You can go and look at the transparency.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
You have a contract with what the US State Department called a mouthpiece for the Chinese Communist Party. You're admitting that live on it. What?
unidentified
I'm not familiar with the mouthpiece for the Communist Chinese Party.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
We'll send it to you, Alex.
I think it's very serious.
unidentified
You're suggesting that I'm connected somehow to the Chinese Communist Party.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
You are directly connected with the Chinese Communist Party.
unidentified
I'm from Georgia, and I'm a redneck, and I am not a communist from China.
Okay, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, I just have two questions.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼
One, you say there's no partisan affiliation with your site, so I'm just wondering why your most recent hire as a staff writer is actually a former intern at the DNC.
Also, secondly, when you're talking Marlo Lee, you can look her up on LinkedIn.
She has DNC prominently displayed on the bottom of her profile.
unidentified
Marlo Lee is a college, just recent College graduate who started on under our internships, our fellowship thing under National Association of Black Journalists.
Facebook sponsored a thing called a Facebook fellowship with the NABJ in order to bring diversity to our staff.
And so she's one of those and she's doing a great job.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼
She also comes from the DNC.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
She came from the DNC.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼
And my second question real quick.
unidentified
She graduated from a college Well, concurrently working at the DNC.
That doesn't make him a Chinese communist.
Where did you get this?
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼
I never said that.
I haven't talked about ByteDance yet.
I'm still talking about the DNC.
But just to bring up the Chinese Communist Party, I'm curious, ByteDance, so the founder of that company, which you list on your website, you take, I'm sure, a lot of money from them.
They actually, the founder of that company in 2018, wrote a letter talking about how all his future ventures, he would quote, You're questioning my patriotism?
This is ridiculous.
content supervision with representatives from the national party congress in the chinese people's political consultative conference yes it talks about how he uses future social media platforms to promote quote socialist core value so i'm curious you can stand up there and say your patriot not so fine and while i'm sure you love this country may be a great thing about the chinese communist this is pretty well i'm not but if you're taking money from the president's talking that they let the chinese communist party with a company called by dance
unidentified
we we we're not involved in promoting socialism or communism or enforcing anything We're consultants for them on what is true, what is fake, on a website.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Alan, how about this?
If we can show you these documents from the State Department, and Natalie can show you the detail of what the head of ByteDance said, would you commit, if you saw the detail of their involvement with the CCP, and particularly the CCP's information arm, would you commit to dropping them as a client?
unidentified
No.
What we're doing is, we're an American company that is providing a service.
This is free enterprise, right?
Will you commit to not doing any business with any company from China?
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Well, I can't since I'm sanctioned by the Chinese Communist Party by law in China.
I can't do it.
I can't do it.
I got sanctioned with Mike.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
I commit to no business with any Chinese Communist Party outlet.
I commit that.
unidentified
Will you?
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Alan, I commit that.
Will you?
unidentified
No, this is ridiculous.
I'm not a Chinese Communist.
I know some of these stories Just say I'm an operative, an agent, a communist Chinese agent.
This is so ridiculous.
Hang on, let's... Useful idiots.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Jack, do you want to jump in here for a few minutes and talk to Alan?
unidentified
I do.
I actually, I just want to play a quick quote from the presidential debate, if I can here.
I got it queued up.
Just one sec.
joe biden ▲ ● ▼
My son has not made money in terms of this thing about, what are you talking about?
unidentified
China.
I have not had it.
The only guy who made money from China is this guy.
He's the only one.
Nobody else has made money from China.
Alright, that's all.
I don't want to get into that too much.
But I did want to go back to an article on Lead Stories from December 14th, where they claimed that Posobiec fabricated a quote that Biden said, my son has not made money in China.
So Alan, I've played for you the quote.
Why did your website claim that I fabricated the quote that Joe Biden just said?
I played it for you.
Joe Biden did not say my son has not made money in China.
Okay.
He just said it.
I just played it for you.
Do you need to hear it again?
No, I'm looking.
In response, this is what we wrote.
And you know this.
In response, you claim that I fabricated the quote.
That included China, your son goes in and he takes out billions of dollars and the mayor of Moscow's wife gave your son 3.5 million.
Alan, I just played you the quote.
I've got the transcript.
I'm looking at the transcript.
I played you the quote.
What do you need to look at the transcript for?
Are you claiming that I made up this video?
Have you have you read our story?
Yes.
Do you appeal?
We flagged you on this, right?
You did flag me on this.
You claimed that I fabricated the quote.
I just played you the quote.
So explain to me why you claim that I fabricated it.
The section of the quote.
The section that I just played.
My son did nothing wrong.
Yes, he did.
Alan, I just played the quote for you.
Play it again.
I want to hear it.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Jack, if you want to, send us an appeal.
Hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Isn't the truth that you're a censor and not a particularly good one?
unidentified
Jack, if you want to, send us an appeal. We'll look at it.
Our appeals desk will review this.
Why should I have to appeal something if you're not right?
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Hang on, hang on, hang on.
Let's go to commercial break.
Alan, just hang on.
We'd love to have you stay through the break.
We got a short thing.
We got Jack Vesovic, Raheem Kassam.
Is this a struggle session?
Come on.
Alan Dukes from Lead Story is going to join us back on the other side of this.
Be back in a second.
unidentified
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.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Mike Lindell's going to join us at 5 o'clock to respond to Alan Duke's offer.
Alan's offered to sit down with an entire team he'll pull together of cyber experts.
He's saying, hey, I like Mike Lindell.
Mike Lindell's a patriot, but I think Mike Lindell's being used by people who don't really know what data is or even misleading them.
So we'll get to Mike Lindell's response today at 5 o'clock.
Alan Duke joins us from Least Stories.
Jack, you want to play?
unidentified
Go ahead.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Sure, sure.
unidentified
Myself and five other members of our staff spent 90 minutes on a Zoom call with Mike Lindell back on February 18.
And in order to talk him through this stuff then.
So we've done that before.
And that was actually our idea.
Mike will also tell you that when he appealed something, or with David J. Harris on something, when he had Ben Carson call me up and correct the record about something, I revised our rating on it.
So Mike will tell you that.
So I've been communicating with Mike and I welcome that opportunity.
I'm looking at the transcript to this debate.
This was the debate in September of last year.
There is no place, there are seven references to my son by Biden.
None of them have that quote in there.
Yeah, here we go.
Here we go.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Ready?
unidentified
So then it goes on.
Which debate is that?
not made money in terms of this thing about uh... what he talked about china i have not had a billy goddard made money from china is this guy the only one nobody else has made money from china that's a good deal with it you know so that it goes on so it's a great that it's it's a national debate Which one?
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
That's the only one they had.
I think they only had one.
unidentified
So you've accused me of fabricating a quote, and I'd like to know why you accuse me of fabricating the quote that we can all see.
Well, maybe your transcript's wrong, dude.
September 30th.
Is this the debate from September 29th, I guess?
Yes.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
There's the 23rd of October, The Hill posted the clip.
unidentified
No, this is not the same debate.
This is not.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
So you've got the wrong debate.
unidentified
No.
So you have the wrong transcript.
Well, I mean, this was from a September debate.
Maybe that's it.
And that's why we have a wrong transcript.
That you need to send us an email at appeals at leadstories.com.
Whatever happened to the burden of proof is on the accuser.
Why do I have to send you an email?
Is this a court of law?
You're wrong.
You've got the wrong transcript.
You've got the wrong debate.
I don't know that I did.
You're completely wrong.
I've already played the quote twice, Alan.
I'm not playing it a third time.
jack posobiec ▲ ● ▼
Why is the burden of proof, and not just for me, but for all the people out there that are posting things, that are making reports, that are doing stuff, why is the burden of proof on us?
unidentified
Shouldn't the burden of proof be on you?
The post that we fact-checked says, in the first debate, Biden said, in the first debate, it's not in the transcript.
I challenge you to show me where it is.
Jack, I've played you the quote twice, Alan.
Now you're mincing words with me.
Okay, hold on.
Apparently the CCP isn't paying you guys enough.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Let's figure this out.
unidentified
Keep on the subject.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Well, it actually has quite a lot to do with Facebook.
Steve, I know we can have our disagreements, Alan, and you will know that I feel a certain way about the thing you do, but let me ask you this serious question.
This is no gotcha, I'm not trying to be funny at all.
You've seen now how contentious these things can be, and you talk about your processes that you have in place to deal with this sort of thing, but still the world It comes back to my first question.
The world will want to know what qualifies you and your staff to be making these judgment calls when clearly you're getting it wrong.
You've got, as far as I'm concerned, you've got it wrong with us almost every single time.
You've got it wrong with Jack Posobiec here.
Not Jack, but... Okay, so you're telling me you've never got anything wrong?
unidentified
Show me something we got wrong and we will correct it.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
You're telling me you've got nothing wrong?
unidentified
In this, Jack said, in the first debate Biden said, that was not from the first debate.
If he wants to go back and change his post, that's fine.
clip. I've played in the second debate. You guys you guys completely blew it. You completely blew it. You posted the wrong transcript. This is my life. Here's the question.
Here's the question. You know, what gives you the right?
What gives you the right to wield this power over others?
To Steve and I'll send a debate where he didn't say Steve and he'll figure out did he say it or didn't he?
It's very simple.
No, I want you to answer Raheem's question.
Please answer Raheem's question.
The first debate did not say it, and that's what we specifically want.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Alan, just real quick, real quick, real quick.
Last question, my last question, my last question.
unidentified
He's going to peel this.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
No, no, no.
Look out.
unidentified
Change him all the time.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Fine, fine, fine.
All of your processes, I take, you know, you've got all your jiggery-pokery to try and avoid accountability here.
Fine.
Let me ask you one final question here.
You talked about fact checking CNN.
Did you fact check CNN about the cause of death of Officer Brian Sicknick?
unidentified
The fact check about the cause of death about Officer Brian Sicknick.
If you want to give me a specific piece of content.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
You know who brought it, right?
unidentified
Yes, but, uh...
Show me a piece of content where you're talking about a specific claim.
raheem kassam ▲ ● ▼
Fine.
I will send you that, Alan.
I'll send it to your email later today and I hope you get a fact check of it.
unidentified
I need to advise that if an organization corrects it or changes it or does reporting that revises it.
Also, it depends.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Alan, we'll get to this stuff and see if we can work it out.
One last question.
We've only got about a minute.
This whole Facebook Supreme Court Why is it not even-handed in that you've got conservatives and known conservatives on here and known people from the conservative news industry that can balance this thing out on this Supreme Court?
Why does it seem to be so one-sided just to progressivism?
unidentified
I'm not involved in that.
I don't know any of those people.
I'm not involved in their process.
It has nothing to do with what I do.
At one time in CNN, if you go on Google, you'll see I think in November of 2019, I gave an interview to CNN, in which I was saying that maybe on some of these tough questions, there should be a Supreme Court.
That was if my idea wasn't adopted later, they came out with something they call the Supreme Court where some people do that is similar, but on a somewhat different area.
There's a difference in community standards and misinformation.
But I'm only on the misinformation part of it.
But I am opposed.
Yeah.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, we got to bounce.
I appreciate you coming on.
Obviously, very heated because it's such a big thing.
We want to have you back on.
I love you.
unidentified
Okay.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
We love you, too.
I know that's going to go well.
Sit down well in the thing.
Raheem, Jack, what's up?
Jack, thanks for hanging out for the entire time.
Natalie, you're a superstar.
Mike Lindell is going to be back on at 5 o'clock today.
He's going to address Alan Duke's offer to sit down and fully go through all his data before the Sioux Falls conference.
We'll be back at 5 o'clock.
▲
Export Selection