March 23, 2022 - Bannon's War Room
48:50
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
Well, let's keep talking about this case. | |
| You also said to this individual, who is an adult, tried as an adult, 18 years old, you also said to him, besides saying that you thought his victims were his peers, you also said there's no reason to think that you are a pedophile. | ||
| And then you went on to say, again, that's another reason why you weren't going to give him, you're only going to give him three months, because you would have judged that he wasn't a pedophile. | ||
| And then you said, and this is something I'd, I really need your help understanding, then you apologized to him. | ||
| And I just have to tell you, I can't quite figure this out. | ||
| You said to him, this is a truly difficult situation. | ||
| I appreciate that your family's in the audience. | ||
| I feel so sorry for them, and for you, and for the anguish this has caused all of you. | ||
| I feel terrible about the collateral consequences of this conviction. | ||
| And then you go on to say, sex offenders are truly shunned in our society. | ||
| I'm just trying to figure out, Judge, is he the victim here, or are the victims the victims? | ||
| You're saying that you are apologizing to him. | ||
| You're saying you're sorry for the anguish this has caused him. | ||
| There was a victim impact statement in this case. | ||
| It didn't get read into the record, but it was there. | ||
| I've described the videos that we have. | ||
| You say earlier in the case, you talk about how heinous these crimes are and you describe them to your credit. | ||
| You describe how heinous it is to your credit and yet here you are giving him three months and apologizing to him and saying you feel sorry for the anguish it's caused him and also saying you think that sex offenders are truly shunned in our society. | ||
| So just talk about that. | ||
| Help me understand. | ||
| I mean, is he a victim? | ||
| Is that your view here? | ||
| Is that why you said this? | ||
| Is that what you meant by it? | ||
| Senator, I again don't have the entire record. | ||
| I remember in that particular case, I considered it to be unusual in part for the reasons that I described. | ||
| I remember in that case that defense counsel was arguing for probation in part because he argued that here we had a very young man just graduated from high school. | ||
| He presented all of his diplomas and certificates and the things that he had done and argued Consistent with what I was seeing in the record, that this particular defendant had gotten into this in a way that was, I thought, inconsistent with some of the other cases that I had seen. | ||
| Well, Senator, my, uh, the point that I was making was that the Sentencing Commission, back when I was part of it and even since, Tasked with the responsibility to evaluate and make recommendations and look at the data and information about cases, has looked at the operation of the Child Pornography Guideline. | ||
| Not so much the statute, but the guidelines, which the Congress has Task the Sentencing Commission with developing, and there are aspects of the Child Pornography Guideline that Congress and legislation has required. | ||
| It required certain enhancements to be included in the guideline, and some of those enhancements, the data is now revealing, don't take into account The change in the way that this horrible offense is now committed. | ||
| The fact that it's easier to commit the offense shouldn't diminish the severity of the punishment, should it? | ||
| I mean, any more than the more widespread availability of certain drugs, the more widespread availability of certain weapons might, surely you wouldn't argue for a lower sentence when certain things become easier in other criminal contexts. | ||
| So why is this one different? | ||
| You think 7.2 months is too long or too short for someone convicted of rape to be sentenced to prison? | ||
| Senator, that's a policy question about the egregious crime of rape and Congress has said that the court is supposed to take into account a number of factors when it sentences. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| I can't answer in the abstract. | ||
| Well, judge, these are not abstract. | ||
| These are very concrete. | ||
| In second grade, we created a gender-neutral toy store. | ||
| We wanted everyone to feel welcome and safe when they were shopping. | ||
| We had so much to learn and prepare before the toy store opened. | ||
| In one important lesson, we dressed dolls in different ways. | ||
| We learned about gender expression, gender expectations, and gender stereotypes. | ||
| In other lessons, we learn what cisgender means and what transgender means, and we learn what it means to be non-binary. | ||
| Do you agree with Justice Ginsburg that there are physical differences between men and women that are enduring? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Um, Senator, respectfully, I I'm not familiar with that particular quote or case, so it's hard for me to comment as to whether or not. | |
| I'd love to get your opinion on that, and you can submit that. | ||
| Do you interpret Justice Ginsburg's meaning of men and women as male and female? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Again, because I don't know the case, I don't know how I interpret it. | |
| I'd need to read the whole thing. | ||
| Can you provide a definition for the word woman? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Can I provide a definition? | |
| Yeah. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I can't. | |
| You can't? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Not in this context. | |
| I'm not a biologist. | ||
| So you believe the meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can't give me a definition? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Senator, in my work as a judge, what I do is I address disputes. | |
| If there's a dispute about a definition, people make arguments and I look at the law and I decide. | ||
| So I'm not I'm not a biologist, so says Judge Jackson. | ||
| We're going to find out if she's going to be a Supreme Court justice as the second day heats up. | ||
| We're going to be going live in and out as we have some of the heavy hitter senators ask the questions. | ||
| It's Wednesday, March 23, year of order 2022. | ||
| Really want to thank Mike Davis and the Article 3 guys. | ||
| If Mike Davis hadn't really done the homework here that other organizations should have, But he did and then worked with people to make sure this stuff got out so it could be the full due diligence could take place. | ||
| We're gonna get to Mike in a second, but there's a. | ||
| Article up in the it was the lead story in the New York Post website this morning It's by John Shruppy over at American principles project. | ||
| It basically makes the case would judge Jackson be the most radical? | ||
| Most radical justice on the Supreme Court. | ||
| I think probably the most radical justice in the history of the Supreme Court if her day one If her day one Performance is any indication, you know, you've got the left On the run here and we do and here's why is that last night CNN and MSNBC would not go back to life coverage. | ||
| She was so pathetic yesterday. | ||
| They would not go back to life coverage for the evening session. | ||
| They really went back to full war pornography from from Ukraine nonstop. | ||
| They cut in with little snippets of. | ||
| Commentators coming in and saying what a magnificent job she did, or crocodile tears running down their face saying it was a historic day and how amazing it was. | ||
| Let's go to John Schweppe. | ||
| John, walk us through the basis of, how do you back up what you said about her being a radical justice on the Supreme Court, sir? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I think one of the first things, Steve, and thanks for having me on, you know, Lindsey Graham actually brought this up on on during his, his interview with her. | |
| You know, why are all these radical left groups supporting you? | ||
| If you're this independent minded, moderate, you know, she's actually flirting with originalism, almost as if she's trying to convince Republicans, she's a conservative justice. | ||
| Why are all these groups like demand justice supporting you, if you're not one of them? | ||
| And I think as the You know, hearing went on yesterday. | ||
| I wrote that. | ||
| I think it was 6 p.m. | ||
| when I submitted it. | ||
| The Marsha Blackburn thing hadn't even happened yet, which was incredible. | ||
| You know, as we see more and more, she is a radical. | ||
| She's just trying to run away from it as fast as she can. | ||
| And I think we look at the money. | ||
| We look at these groups that are supporting her and we see what type of agenda she would actually rule in favor of as a judge, as a justice. | ||
| You say radical, but I've got the Wall Street Journal, I think, editorial page says, you know, she represents the best of America or it's morning in America. | ||
| You've got Mitt Romney really going after, you know, Hawley and Cotton and Cruz yesterday. | ||
| And Blackburn, for some pretty direct questioning, he's kind of flitting around like he normally does, saying these guys are way off base. | ||
| So when you say radical, how can the Wall Street Journal, which I think is the worst paper in the nation and probably the worst paper in the world, terrible economic coverage and the worst editorial page in the history of mankind, But how do you have those guys, you know, all the business community and all the Chamber of Commerce guys and everybody watching this show that's a business guy reads it non-stop, you know, all the folks that are real folks, you know, read it. | ||
| You got the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Paul Gigeon, those guys, you know, they got big crocodile tears running down their cheeks and they don't say, not only they don't say she's radical, they say she's actually, they're making the case that she's a moderate to a slightly conservative judge and will make a slightly conservative justice, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, we actually saw that from National Review, too. | |
| They went after Hawley for his line of attack. | ||
| But look, I think what it comes down to is these guys are all in that kind of Koch-funded world where criminal justice reform is their top issue. | ||
| It's the most important thing to them. | ||
| And this is the criminal justice reform nominee. | ||
| I mean, when you look at her record on sentencing, she's been absolutely terrible. | ||
| And if you look at what the left wants, what the Koch-funded right wants, They really want to see a reduction in these sentences. | ||
| They want to see less time for pedophiles. | ||
| And it's crazy to normal people, I think, but that is where they are, and I think that's why they're defending her. | ||
| By the way, that criminal justice reform came through President Trump, which I think he even admits is the worst piece of legislation he ever pushed. | ||
| What do you expect over the next couple of days? | ||
| Do you think that this nomination is in jeopardy, or do you think this just reinforces in November the radical nature of the Democratic Party, and quite frankly the establishment, even the Republican establishment, who's given her a pass? | ||
| Is it just going to be another weapon in the culture war? | ||
| Or do you think she's actually in jeopardy of having Manchin and other people flip and not getting 50 votes from the Republicans? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think it's still very likely she'll be confirmed, but I will tell you it's moved very quickly in just a couple days. | |
| So when Hawley was the first senator out really criticizing her and going after her, it felt like this might be a 65-70 vote confirmation. | ||
| Now, you know, based on my talks with With offices, I feel like we're at least at 47 or 48 Republicans voting no. | ||
| Romney's always a question mark. | ||
| And then there's Collins and Murkowski. | ||
| So APP, I know we're working on something with Collins that'll come out tomorrow, trying to push her on this. | ||
| Murkowski's always a question mark. | ||
| She's been all over the place in previous votes. | ||
| I think she voted against Sotomayor, for example. | ||
| So, you know, and then it comes down to Joe Manchin. | ||
| And I know it's very unlikely that he would talk to the Democrats on this. | ||
| But Joe Manchin is someone who likes having the power. | ||
| And he's someone who, you never know what he's going to do in the future. | ||
| He does have an election in 2024. | ||
| So I would say it's non-zero, Steve. | ||
| I don't want to, you know, sell your audience on that this is going to happen. | ||
| It's very unlikely that we'll reject her. | ||
| But I don't think it's over. | ||
| And I think we've got to keep pushing and calling our senators and trying to get them to vote. | ||
| Okay, you're saying right now you think it's 47-48 max with Collins, Murkowski, and Romney being the question marks, and obviously Joe Manchin on the Democratic side. | ||
| This is your current headcount? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| Yep. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Schweppe, how do people get to you? | ||
| They've got to be following you. | ||
| Obviously, Terry's going to join us here in a moment with Mike Davis. | ||
| How do people get to you? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm JohnSchweppe on Twitter, and that's where I've been tweeting about this, and that's the best place to follow me. | |
| Let's put his Twitter account in the live chat to make sure everybody gets it. | ||
| John, thank you very much. | ||
| Appreciate it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thanks for having me. | |
| I want to go to Mike Davis. | ||
| We're going to have a cold open in the B Block. | ||
| Mike, real quickly, we've got about a minute. | ||
| What's your assessment of Schweppes? | ||
| Would she be the most radical justice we ever had to sit on the High Court? | ||
| It seems that way. | ||
| I mean, she has a pretty leftist record going back all the way to law school for 25 years. | ||
| She's not your grandmother's liberal. | ||
| She's a leftist. | ||
| She's in the Obama camp leftist, where she's done some pretty radical stuff in her career, including going out of her way to represent Gitmo detainees and advocating for lesser sentences for people who possess and distribute child pornography. | ||
| Those have been two of her biggest pet issues. | ||
| Okay, we're going to take a short break. | ||
| We've got a cold open. | ||
| We've got Mike Davis, who's led this effort at Article 3. | ||
| We've also got the great Terry Schelling from the American Principles Project, where John Schweppe is also one of the policy guys. | ||
| So we're going to return. | ||
| This is a historic second day. | ||
| It was supposed to be on the glide slope. | ||
| I don't think it's on the glide slope. | ||
| Talking about 47, maybe 48 votes Republican votes against. | ||
| We're going to drill down on that. | ||
| We've got Naomi Wolf. | ||
| We've got James O'Keefe. | ||
| A packed show this morning, but we're going to cut in. | ||
| As necessary. | ||
| As soon as we hear the flare go up, we're going to be going live with Real America's voice to the confirmation hearing. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Back in a moment in the War Room. | |
| The Georgetown Day School's curriculum, it is filled and overflowing with critical race theory. | ||
| That among the books that are either assigned or recommended, They include Critical Race Theory, An Introduction. | ||
| They include The End of Policing, An Advocacy for Abolishing Police. | ||
| They include How to Be an Anti-Racist by Ibram Kendi. | ||
| They include literally stacks and stacks of books, and I'll tell you two of the ones that were most stunning. | ||
| They include a book called Anti-Racist Baby by Ibram Kendi. | ||
| And there are portions of this book that I find really quite remarkable. | ||
| One portion of the book says babies are taught to be racist or anti-racist. | ||
| There is no neutrality. | ||
| Another portion of the book, they recommend the babies confess when being racist. | ||
| Now this is a book that is taught at Georgetown Day School to students in pre-K through second grade, so four through seven years old. | ||
| Do you agree with this book that is being taught with kids that babies are racist? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Senator, I do not believe that any child should be made to feel as though they are racist or though they are not valued or though they are less than, that they are victims, that they are oppressors. | |
| I don't believe in any of that, but what I will say is that when you You asked me whether or not this was taught in schools, critical race theory. | ||
| My understanding is that critical race theory as an academic theory is taught in law schools, and to the extent that you were asking the question, I understood you to be addressing public schools. | ||
| Georgetown Day School, just like the religious school that Justice Barrett was on the board of, is a private school. | ||
| Okay, so you agree critical race theory is taught at Georgetown Day School? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I don't know because the board does not control the curriculum. | |
| The board does not focus on that. | ||
| That's not what we do as board members. | ||
| So I'm actually not sure. | ||
| Mr. Chairman, before we start this questioning, right before the break, I asked the chairman about Senator Hirono had referenced five probation reports that were not in the record. | ||
| I asked the chairman whether the Democrats had access to information about Judge Jackson's judicial record that Republicans did not. | ||
| You did not answer me at the time, but as we return... I can give you an answer. | ||
| Okay, well, hold on, let me finish my question. | ||
| When we returned, and when we walked in, each of the Republicans was handed this piece of paper, which is the first time any of us have ever seen, which is a chart of probation recommendations. | ||
| We were just told that the White House gave it to Democrats earlier today. | ||
| I don't know if that's true or not. | ||
| And what I would ask you is, is there anything else that Democrats have access to in this case that they're not sharing with Republicans on this committee. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So I want to address that issue that was raised yesterday about records. | |
| Senator Cruz raised a very legitimate question about data related to U.S. probation officer recommendations. | ||
| The White House and members of this committee use that information to attempt to discredit information raised by Senator Hawley and others about the nominee's sentencing record as a district judge. | ||
| No one on our side of the aisle had access to this information. | ||
| In fact, before this past week, I'm not sure anyone but the probation office and the court had access to this information. | ||
| My understanding is that the probation office recommendations aren't part of any public record. | ||
| The specific sentencing recommendations aren't always shared with prosecutors or defendants. | ||
| Somehow it appears that the White House obtained this information. | ||
| It was leaked in pieces to media outlets in order to cast doubt on legitimate members' questions, and then it was provided to only Democratic members of this committee without any of the underlying documentation. | ||
| OK, thank you. | ||
| Thank you very much. | ||
| I want to go to Mike Davis. | ||
| Mike, this gets to the heart of it, of what you've actually been putting forward to say, hey, we just need all the records. | ||
| What is this? | ||
| The White House now is specifically hiding information. | ||
| Is that correct? | ||
| Yeah, I mean, this is what happens is when you do these sentences as a federal judge, you have to look to the statutes as passed by Congress. | ||
| You look at the sentencing guidelines as As recommended by the United States Sentencing Commission that on which Judge Jackson's served for four years. | ||
| You look at the Assistant U.S. | ||
| Attorney's recommendation and courts can also look at the U.S. | ||
| Probation Office. | ||
| It's called a pre-sentence report and the pre-sentence report is confidential. | ||
| It's not public. | ||
| And it goes into a lot of details. | ||
| This is after the finding of guilt, and it informs the judge about the convicts, I guess, their history, their backgrounds, what are some aggravating factors and mitigating factors. | ||
| This is not public, right? | ||
| The fact that the probation office let this get out, or someone let this get out, Judge Jackson maybe? | ||
| I'm not sure how this got to the White House. | ||
| I'm not sure how this got to Democrats. | ||
| I'm not sure how this got to the media. | ||
| This is a serious problem. | ||
| These are confidential records that are not released. | ||
| These are court records, and it's a big question. | ||
| It's scandalous, really, that this information was leaked out in such a political way. | ||
| But don't you, this is what I'm confused about, don't you need to review that to ascertain the situation with the child pornography? | ||
| Isn't this a record you need? | ||
| You're saying this is not a record you need and they're only leaking it out because it supports her, it supports her decisions on sentencing? | ||
| So, Chairman Dick Durbin and the Democrats were hiding 48,000 pages of her records from the United States Sentencing Commission from 2010 to 2013 when she was advocating for a more lenient punishment for people who possess and distribute child pornography. | ||
| That's separate from this issue. | ||
| What they're trying to do here is she's coming up with excuses. | ||
| This is an excuse. | ||
| She has had a For 25 years, she has advocated for less punishment for sex predators of kids. | ||
| She's going back to her Harvard Law School and she got caught here. | ||
| She got caught handing out light sentences significantly below the sentencing guidelines, significantly below the prosecutor's recommendation. | ||
| She got caught handing out these lenient sentences. | ||
| And so now she's trying to blame the probation office. | ||
| She's trying to blame these confidential records from the probation office. | ||
| But even if you look at what the probation office is recommending, in one of these cases where the defendant faced up to 120 months in prison, And she sentenced the guy to only three months, even the probation office recommended 18 months. | ||
| So it's just, she's even going below what the DC probation office is recommending for these people who possess and distribute child pornography. | ||
| I mean, it really even undermines her own arguments. | ||
| Look, Morning Joe, I don't know if we have this, but they were laughing at Hawley and this line of questioning about the child pornography. | ||
| Mitt Romney came out and said it's way off the mark. | ||
| What do you say, Mike Davis? | ||
| So, Mitt Romney said that just even asking these questions is off course somehow. | ||
| United States senators doing their constitutional duty and vetting a Supreme Court nominee's judicial record. | ||
| Seven specific cases where she handed out sentences that went light, that she went soft on child pornographers. | ||
| And Mitt Romney says that's off course. | ||
| If Mitt Romney actually believes that, he needs to resign from the Senate because he's a disgrace. | ||
| Not only is he not doing his constitutional duty by not fully vetting a Supreme Court nominee for a lifetime appointment, he's also not taking seriously the issue of child pornography and how that affects kids, how that damages kids for the rest of their lives and creates harm for other kids. | ||
| Be specific, because Romney's come out after yesterday's testimony. | ||
| Let's be as specific and granular as possible. | ||
| What did she say in her answers that you think warrants either further scrutiny or that she's spinning and she's not getting to the heart of it? | ||
| What is your biggest beef that you would go back to Romney to say, you're just wrong and here's why? | ||
| So, Mitt Romney is, I don't know if he's trying to win the Lincoln Project wing of the party or what. | ||
| There are seven specific cases that Senator Hawley and Ted Cruz have raised. | ||
| Seven specific cases. | ||
| So when Judge Jackson was a district court judge for eight years, she only had about a hundred sentences, right? | ||
| She sentenced about a hundred federal felony cases in her eight years on the bench. | ||
| In seven of those cases, which is a pretty high number compared to the rest of the country, in seven of those cases they involved cases where she had discretion To sentence people who possess and distributed child pornography. | ||
| So seven, you know, roughly 7% of federal criminal sentences as a district court judge, she had seven cases involving distribution of child pornography in 100% of those cases. | ||
| All seven of those cases, she sentenced below the sentencing guidelines We've only got a minute. | ||
| She tried to answer those yesterday. | ||
| recommend it. That goes to the heart of who she is as a judge and as a person. | ||
| We've only got a minute. She tried to answer those yesterday. | ||
| Were the answers not good enough for you as far as what her answers were? | ||
| She didn't answer the question. | ||
| She blamed the statute. | ||
| She blamed 3553A, which is nonsense. | ||
| She blamed the probation office, which is nonsense. | ||
| And then she invoked her two daughters and the fact that she had the paternal order of police. | ||
| And she's, you know, she teared up and talked about her uncle and her brother being in law enforcement. | ||
| It's nonsense. | ||
| She did not. | ||
| She did not refute the facts. | ||
| Okay, Mike, I know you got other media hits now that we made you a star. | ||
| Actually, you made yourself a star. | ||
| Real quickly, what's your Twitter feed? | ||
| That's non-stop, and we'll get you back later in the afternoon. | ||
| Mike Davis, Article 3, what's your Twitter so people can follow you? | ||
| M-R-D-D-M-I-A. | ||
| M-R-D-D-M-I-A. | ||
| I appreciate it, Steve. | ||
| Okay, Mike. | ||
| Mike, follow his Twitter. | ||
| He's following this non-stop. | ||
| The hearings go on. | ||
| We've got Naomi Wolf next. | ||
| We'll get Terry Schilling in here. | ||
| We've got James O'Keefe. | ||
| Nothing but hitters today in this historic second day of Judge Jackson's confirmation hearing. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Back in a moment. | |
| Pandemic. | ||
| With Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| The epidemic is a demon and we cannot let this demon hide. | ||
| War Room. | ||
| Pandemic. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Okay, welcome back. | ||
| MyPillow.com promo code War Room. | ||
| We've got all the sales up there. | ||
| We've got now additional new products they've never offered before. | ||
| It's on our square. | ||
| You've got to go to MyPillow.com promo code War Room. | ||
| Got everything for sleep, everything for your comfort. | ||
| Go check it out today. | ||
| Support the armor-piercing shell that Mike's laying down. | ||
| Of course, your humble servants here at the War Room. | ||
| MyPillow.com, promo code War Room. | ||
| Okay, I want to go to, by the way, it is technically day three, but day one is just the opening hoo-ha, the day two of this, of the due diligence, I guess it is. | ||
| And the question's still out there, and this is why we'll put up the number for the Senate. | ||
| Please call your Senator. | ||
| Just a request that all the documents be turned over. | ||
| Judge Jackson should be given a fair, Hearing and there shouldn't be any questions Unasked or unanswered when this is over. | ||
| She's got the chance. | ||
| This is day two of it, which all the senators get 20 minutes We're gonna be cutting into coverage throughout the day with real America's voice if if any more fireworks going Terry Schilling Shruppy works over at American Prince of Prussia that would be the most radical justice on the Supreme Court One of the concerns I have is on the situation of critical race theory and CRT where she said oh, I thought you were talking about Public schools not it. | ||
| I found that to be disingenuous Also her why is she avoiding? | ||
| I don't think people understand get their head around Daily Mail He put the Daily Mail story back up when he get chance the Daily Mail biggest paper in the world Screaming massive headline is about this. | ||
| She wouldn't answer the question about about just a difference between a man and a woman Terry Schilling no so Steve I think what we have to realize is that The lines are very tight in the Senate. | ||
| This is a 50-50 Senate. | ||
| Kamala Harris is going to have to break the tie here if all the Republicans vote against her. | ||
| So she, Kentaji Brown, can't go too far to the left, can't go too far to the right. | ||
| That's why she's saying things like, I'm an originalist, basically, right? | ||
| As if we're supposed to believe that this is an Antonin Scalia type justice. | ||
| See, we have to also be very clear. | ||
| This is the woke version. | ||
| of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, right? | ||
| Like this is the next iteration. | ||
| She will be the most extreme and radical left winger on the court that we've ever seen. | ||
| I mean, look at the exchange between Katonji Brown and Marsha Blackburn, right? | ||
| Marsha Blackburn asked her a very simple question. | ||
| Can you define what a woman is? | ||
| And what was her response? | ||
| Well, I'm not a biologist. | ||
| Steve, I don't need a degree in biology to know what a woman is. | ||
| It's an adult human female, by the way, just in case anyone in the boardroom doesn't know. | ||
| It's an adult human female. | ||
| What we're seeing right now is this nominee is obfuscating, misleading, and distorting the truth, and when all that fails, they gaslight us, right? | ||
| And so this is a total nightmare for her, and she has a very tight rope to walk here. | ||
| The reason I know that they're worried is last night on the coverage on MSNBC and CNN, after the evening break, they came back for several more hours of questioning, and they didn't play, I don't think, a live second of it. | ||
| They went to, they had some summary, and just quick summaries of her testimony during the day, and none of the heated exchanges, none of the really heated exchanges. | ||
| Of course, Jorian Reed and the crowd up there had their pom-poms out. | ||
| They're worried. | ||
| They're definitely worried, and that's why today is going to be so important. | ||
| And my point is, hey, she should definitely have a fair hearing, but you've got to turn over all the documents, everybody's got to get a chance to go through them, and you've got to ask questions. | ||
| For her sake, if not even the country's, to make sure that if she does get this appointment, a lifetime appointment, that there's no questions, that everything got asked and drilled down in detail. | ||
| Terry, I know you guys are all over this. | ||
| So what can people expect today from American Principles Project? | ||
| I know you want to give your Twitter feed and everything like that, but what else is going on as you guys follow this? | ||
| So the biggest thing that I want to get across to these legislators, these senators that are going to be voting on this, is that this vote will affect your future in politics. | ||
| And it most likely, if you vote the wrong way, you will be punished for this at the polls. | ||
| This is going to affect Democrats in swing states like Arizona, Nevada, Georgia this we are going to be running ads against these guys in the election. | ||
| And so you have to be very careful about how you vote to confirm on whether or not you confirm a justice who's been lenient on sex offenders on those that that case the Hawkins case where that kid had over 600 images. | ||
| of child pornography, violent, brutal rape against children and got a lenient sentence. | ||
| That's what we're going to be holding around you. So right now we're producing an ad. | ||
| I think you'll like it. I think the world will love it. I'm excited to share with you guys what's done. But that's what we're focused on is holding these guys accountable and making sure they know your election's at stake. This even if confirmed, this is gonna be a tough vote. | ||
| And I'm telling you, places like Arizona and Nevada, these senators that are in these tight dogfights right now, this is going to be a tough vote just because of how her answers the last couple of days. | ||
| And today we're going to find out more, but this is going to be a tough vote. | ||
| OK, Terry Schilling, how did they get to you during the day today? | ||
| Because it's very important. | ||
| How do people follow you? | ||
| It's just Schilling1776 on Twitter, Gutter, True Social, all of that. | ||
| And AmericanPrinciplesProject.org if you want to help us fund this ad. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Everybody, let's go pound into American Principles. | ||
| Give them a helping hand. | ||
| Thank you, sir. | ||
| Appreciate it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| I've got Naomi Wolf. | ||
| I got breaking. | ||
| Can we play the James O'Keefe? | ||
| Because I get to O'Keefe. | ||
| O'Keefe's now. | ||
| Let's play James O'Keefe's cold open. | ||
| We'll go to James. | ||
| Project Veritas has just obtained documents showing the SDNY was spying on Project Veritas journalists well before the FBI raided the homes of our journalists last November, secretly reading our emails, concealing that from the court in our case against the SDNY. | ||
| In November 2021, the FBI raids our homes and seizes 47 electronic devices, including cell phones, laptops, and thumb drives. | ||
| Within five days, U.S. | ||
| District Court Judge Annalisa Torres ordered the Southern District of New York to pause its review of my devices. | ||
| And within a month, ordered the SDNY to turn our seized materials over to a special master who had supervised the SDNY's review to protect our First Amendment and journalistic privileges. | ||
| Recently obtained legal documents from Microsoft Corporation reveal that despite Judge Torres' orders, Between November 2020 and April 2021, the Department of Justice went to six magistrates and obtained a series of secret warrants, orders, and a subpoena to surreptitiously collect privileged communications and contacts of eight American journalists, myself included, from Microsoft. | ||
| The DOJ even sought and obtained numerous secrecy orders preventing Microsoft from disclosing the surveillance to anyone. | ||
| The SDNY also went around Judge Torres and the Special Master and obtained two secrecy orders after the Special Master had been appointed. | ||
| The SDNY's surveillance of Project Veritas journalists was done as part of the DOJ's unprecedented investigation into Ashley Biden's diary. | ||
| The documents collected from these email accounts date back as far as January 2020, eight months before we even knew the diary existed. | ||
| While the Special Master litigation proceeded, the government apparently misled the court by omission, by not disclosing that it had already obtained other privileged materials. | ||
| The SDNY was ordered to turn over all materials to the Special Master. | ||
| They didn't. | ||
| The SDNY was ordered to stop reviewing our materials. | ||
| They didn't. | ||
| The SDNY has an obligation to be honest with the court. | ||
| They weren't. | ||
| Okay, by the way, the person who warned us all about this over a year ago was Naomi Wolf. | ||
| She'd be like, hey, this is all going to happen. | ||
| James, this is so shocking. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This is like out of the lives of others, the Stasi. | |
| I think people are so stunned. | ||
| But why? | ||
| First off, this is totally illegal behavior, I think. | ||
| Why are they coming after James O'Keefe? | ||
| Why are they acting like the KGB or like the Gestapo or like the Stasi in East Germany, sir? | ||
| What have you done that they've singled you out? | ||
| I think, and I think your lawsuits here are going to be enormous, to actually try to do this to you and then lie and try to cover it up, sir. | ||
| Well, Steve, that is the question, and thank you for playing those 90 seconds on camera, because let me just repeat the facts, reiterate before I even speculate here. | ||
| A special master was appointed to oversee our case, and that federal Article III judge cited journalistic privilege and First Amendment concerns. | ||
| And just so your audience knows exactly what happened, the Southern District of New York went to magistrate judges and asked for gag orders on Microsoft Corporation. | ||
| We use Microsoft Outlook for our emails. | ||
| And they went back to January 2020, eight months before we even knew about this diary, which we didn't publish, by the way. | ||
| This is insane. | ||
| And I know it's hard to shock people these days. | ||
| I'm sure nothing surprises your audience. | ||
| But this is, in fact, a new Rubicon that they've crossed, targeting an American journalist like this. | ||
| And they went behind the federal judge's back, Steve. | ||
| So we just filed an order yesterday. | ||
| The ACLU is defending me. | ||
| Can you believe that? | ||
| The ACLU yesterday put out a statement. | ||
| Why are they targeting me? | ||
| Because I'm doing my job. | ||
| I'm reporting on the corruption. | ||
| And they don't like that. | ||
| And it's fine for them not to like it, but they can't break the law. | ||
| And they issued secret warrants, Steve. | ||
| I just found out this week. | ||
| Uber contacted us. | ||
| Microsoft is not the only vendor that they secretly subpoenaed. | ||
| And they did this in total secrecy, and now it's all coming out. | ||
| They didn't want it to come out. | ||
| That's why they put a gag order on Microsoft, and someone at Microsoft tipped me off a couple of days ago, and that's how we found out about this. | ||
| OK, you're breaking it. | ||
| Look, I've known you for 10, 12 years with Andrew, and even then you were an acorn. | ||
| You took them down. | ||
| But you've perfected this model now. | ||
| Is it because of Facebook and all these massive breaking stories or to not put too fine a point on it? | ||
| Did they do this because? | ||
| Well, I mean, this is the first time anyone's ever heard of the Feds being involved in an abandoned diary. | ||
| Estoppo and the Palace Guard for Biden because of the diary? | ||
| Or do you think they're coming after you for your normal course of business, amazing investigative work, sir? | ||
| Well, I mean, this is the first time anyone's ever heard of the Feds being involved in an abandoned diary. | ||
| There's no federal jurisdiction over a diary, which by the way, I did not publish. | ||
| The Supreme Court, under Nicky DeVopper, protects the right of a reporter to publish a document that was given to him, even if the document was stolen by a third party. | ||
| It appears, in this case, it wasn't. | ||
| I didn't even know anything about that. | ||
| In any event, you're asking me why they're coming after me. | ||
| I don't like to speculate, Steve. | ||
| I don't know why. | ||
| I think that the question really is this. | ||
| Did the Attorney General of the United States authorize this? | ||
| His name is Merrick Garland. | ||
| Or was this something that the Southern District of New York did autonomously? | ||
| The federal judge didn't even know about it. | ||
| So this is a scandal. | ||
| I've known you, Steve Bannon, for, like you said, 10 to 12 years. | ||
| This is by far the biggest thing that's ever happened. | ||
| This is a 60 Minutes level event. | ||
| This is a big, big deal. | ||
| As you know, Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder, his biggest regret was subpoenaing Rosen, a Fox reporter. | ||
| That's what he said was his biggest regret. | ||
| This is the Department of Justice issuing secret warrants and gag orders against Microsoft Corporation for journalist emails and hiding it from a federal judge. | ||
| This is a big deal. | ||
| And I understand they've done it to people before, but not like this. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This is a different Rubicon. | |
| Okay, we got a minute. | ||
| I want people to get access to this fight that you've got right now because, as you said, this is huge and there's something wrong here and people got to be held accountable for this. | ||
| How do people follow you on this, James? | ||
| Well, I mean, the New York Times has actually a positive email up about it today. | ||
| And I think the reason why the article is positive is because these people in the New York Times are like, holy crap, we don't want to be on the wrong side of history here. | ||
| They've switched their tune. | ||
| So it's everywhere. | ||
| It's on Telegram, New York Times, ACLU. | ||
| It's on top of Drudge Report. | ||
| Politico's got an article. | ||
| Telegram is the best place to download the documents. | ||
| We're uploading all of these secret warrants, Steve, gag order warrants. | ||
| 41 G's they're called and they're on it's not all every medium telegram is the best place project Veritas comm we appreciate you bringing attention to all this James, it's huge. | ||
| And I just want to let the audience know before we punched a break. | ||
| They fear James O'Keefe almost more than anybody. | ||
| And it's because he's perfected this investigative model. | ||
| This is also about the Biden thing, no doubt, but he's a danger to the apparatus. | ||
| O'Keefe, you're a patriot and a hero, obviously. | ||
| Thank you very much for joining us, sir. | ||
| We'll continue to push this hard. | ||
| Dr. Naomi Wolf, next. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We rejoice when there's no more. Let's take down the CCD! | |
| Monitors us. Censors us. Deplatforms us. | ||
| Conservatives have been helpless to do anything about it, until now. | ||
| Join Getter, the social media platform that supports free speech and opposes cancel culture. | ||
| On Getter, you can express your political beliefs without fear of Silicon Valley liberals coming after you. | ||
| Getter is led by former Trump advisor and War Room co-host Jason Miller, who saw what big tech did to President Trump and decided to fight back. | ||
| Getter is the fastest growing social media platform in history, with millions of users, including prominent conservatives like Mike Pompeo, Steve Cortez, and Steve Bannon. | ||
| Join Getter. | ||
| It's in the App Store, the Google Play Store, and at getter.com. | ||
| Longer posts, longer videos, sharper and clearer pictures. | ||
| And unlike the Silicon Valley oligarchs, Getter will never sell your data. | ||
| Send a message today. | ||
| Join Getter. | ||
| It's time to cancel, cancel culture. | ||
| Okay, we're trying to provide a platform here at The War Room for people that come with facts, evidence, data, science, no matter what the apparatus says, in the search for truth. | ||
| We're very proud to put on people like James O'Keefe and our next guest, Naomi Wolf. | ||
| Naomi, I'm not kidding, the movie The Lives of Others was about the Stasi and how they had infiltrated the family units in East Germany and really broke German society. | ||
| Your new book is The Body of Others, and I know there's a play there, but I'm not kidding. | ||
| You're the type of person that's out there relentlessly drilling down at the apparatus. | ||
| I mean, you're at the big pharma, and quite frankly, you warned us all this was going to happen, what, a year, a year and a half ago when you started coming on the show. | ||
| Uh, that this type of surveillance and these types of that they would play smash mouth and hardball. | ||
| So I know you're all over the Pfizer thing. | ||
| You've also, I mean, talk about edgy tonight. | ||
| You've got the other webinar. | ||
| I want to give details to everybody should that watches the war should go to this webinar tonight. | ||
| Totally free. | ||
| Watch it. | ||
| It's about, uh, you taking action in your own hands and filing criminal charges. | ||
| You've already done the thing of civil charges. | ||
| Everybody in the audience should see that. | ||
| I know from the feedback I'm getting from the war room policy that are participating, in this war room daily clout Pfizer investigation, people couldn't be more excited about, they just feel like they're really adding value and doing something for their kids, their family, their community and the country. | ||
| So Dr. Wolf, take it away. | ||
| Mr. O'Keefe was saying, I realized when I was listening to him that he's really pioneered this model of crowdsourcing knowledge and investigations. | ||
| And this incredible war room posse now taking on the Pfizer documents, 55,000 court ordered release documents. | ||
| It's a similar kind of model, definitely inspired by what he did. | ||
| And it that every day that I see what they're doing, I feel more inspired and humbled. | ||
| It is a transformational model and it's proving out. | ||
| So I just want to update people a little bit. | ||
| And then I want to read a moving note from one of the volunteers. | ||
| Every day, new facts surface. | ||
| So I just want people to be patient and understand that there are two tracks. | ||
| In two weeks, I will present a summary, interim report and press release about the findings for the media, for followers, for the community that have come up. | ||
| However, that is not the same track, which the lawyers reminded me last night is a longer track of the attorneys, these 250 attorneys deliberating and creating subcommittees and making decisions themselves and asking for follow-up documents from the volunteers. | ||
| That's going to be a longer process and it's also a confidential process, right? | ||
| Because we don't want to let, or they don't want to let, the other side's lawyers, you know, know what kinds of approaches they're taking, what they're investigating. | ||
| So just, I will release an update in two weeks and then a month of full press release Thank you. | ||
| So I'm not going to share his name because I haven't cleared that with him yet, but he said, I got involved because of War Room. | ||
| legal process takes longer. So I just wanted to update everyone and in the meantime may I read this incredibly moving note that one of the volunteers shared. Thank you. So I'm not gonna share his name because I haven't cleared that with him yet but he said I got involved because of war room. | ||
| My brother was pretty much forced by his employer to get the Pfizer vaccine. After the second dose his body developed a rash all over that covered most of it. | ||
| He had blisters that were really big and filled up with fluid. | ||
| Plus, I'm sorry, pus was coming out of his fingernails. | ||
| He went to the docs. | ||
| They put him on prednisone, et cetera. | ||
| A naturopathic doc is trying ozone therapy, irradiating his blood. | ||
| Ten treatments. | ||
| His veins were collapsed, so it was hard to get the first treatment. | ||
| He has suffered so much for about two months now. | ||
| And then it goes on about how they had to send his blood tissue to a national lab in Utah because his case is so rare. | ||
| And he said, I can go on and on about those who are gone now who got the vaccine and then got COVID and died. | ||
| And then he concludes, these documents are really revealing. | ||
| I can see why Pfizer wanted to keep them under seal for 75 years. | ||
| Pfizer, and this is a headline, right? | ||
| Pfizer was required to report all adverse events, SAEs and deaths to VAERS, The government accounting database. | ||
| Within 15 days of receipt, he's checking if they complied. | ||
| I don't see that they complied. | ||
| He mentions that his Senators Thatcher and Linthicum have presented a grand jury investigation demand for all of this criminal activity and blatant disregard for human lives. | ||
| And I want to update here that a week after Senators Linthicum and Thatcher and Dr. Ely submitted their grand jury investigation demand, It was accepted by the Ninth Circuit Court. | ||
| You may notice that Rochelle Walensky of the CDC quietly corrected her website where they had over counted 72,000 plus deaths as COVID and she blamed it on a coding error. | ||
| So you guys are already having a massive impact. | ||
| She is a defendant, as I mentioned, and she's behaving accordingly. | ||
| She's cleaning up her paper trail. | ||
| He goes on, I've read quite a bit of these documents. | ||
| They had seven deaths in December 2020 after the vaccine. | ||
| So really listen to that. | ||
| It's interesting to see that many were in senior care homes, right? | ||
| So this is the kind of headline you didn't hear that this volunteer has surfaced just by reading these documents. | ||
| And then he said some people died within receiving within one or two days of receiving the dose. | ||
| Then he concluded they shut down Janssen for just one death and many cases of deep vein thrombosis. | ||
| But they had seven cases in Phase 1-2 Pfizer study and these deaths. | ||
| And then he said, and this is the headline again, I wonder why Pfizer was given FDA approval when there were over 400 deaths already in VAERS when the FDA was considering approving Comirnaty. | ||
| So just to conclude by his close reading, He's identified huge headline number one, are all the adverse events filed, reported, and in VAERS? | ||
| And the second thing he's pointing out is a competitor vaccine, which is not an mRNA vaccine, right? | ||
| And which doesn't have conflicts of interest with government agencies was shut down. | ||
| Pfizer's kept going in spite of deaths. | ||
| Dr. Wolfe, just hang on. | ||
| We're going to go through the break. | ||
| I want to talk about tonight's webinar. | ||
| All next, Liz, you're in the war room. |
Export Selection