Jan. 26, 2023 - Bannon's War Room
47:58
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is what you're fighting for. | ||
| I mean, every day you're out there. | ||
| What they're doing is blowing people off. | ||
| If you continue to look the other way and shut up, then the oppressors, the authoritarians, get total control and total power. | ||
| Because this is just like in Arizona. | ||
| This is just like in Georgia. | ||
| It's another element that backs them into a quarter and shows their lies and misrepresentations. | ||
| This is why this audience is gonna have to get engaged. | ||
| As we've told you, this is the fight. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All this nonsense, all this spin, they can't handle the truth. | |
| I strongly support the notion that Democrats, as the Steering and Policy Committee has done this week, to be able to push forward It's a slate of committee assignments, which includes Representative Ilhan Omar for Foreign Affairs, and that should be accepted by House Republicans. | ||
| As a child, who survived war, lived in a refugee camp, I would have never imagined that I would one day have the opportunity to serve on a subcommittee on Africa global health and global human rights. | ||
| I would not have believed that I would one day not just serve as the first African-born member of Congress, but on a committee that oversees policies towards the continent. | ||
| Kevin McCarthy's purely partisan move to strip us from our committee is not only a political stunt, but also a blow to the integrity of our democratic institution and threat to our national security. | ||
| Okay, welcome back. Thursday, 26 January, Year of Our Lord, 2023. | ||
| Thank you for the second hour here of the War Room, our late afternoon, early evening show. | ||
| We're going to pivot, and I want to talk about some congressmen. | ||
| We're going to get to... Ruben Gallego and Don Bacon in a minute with Frankie Stokes of The National File. | ||
| We've got Natalie Winters here to talk to us. | ||
| Also, I have Matt Brainerd about the RNC. Also, we're going to discuss everything that's going on in the weapons procurement and the massive ripoff in Ukraine. | ||
| Also, the war strategy over there. | ||
| I've got to start, though. Something that's heated up and kind of even a new development as we come to air. | ||
| We've asked Royce White to join us. | ||
| Royce ran in a primary out to unseat Omar. | ||
| Now there's a couple of Republicans have come forward, I think Nancy Mace, in the sparts of Indiana. | ||
| have come forward and said they're not going to vote for this. | ||
| This takes a whole vote of the House. | ||
| You ran against her, and you ran a pretty tough campaign, Royce. | ||
| Tell the audience your thoughts on Ilhan Omar, and if we couldn't remove her at the ballot box, is it appropriate in your thinking that she should be removed from the Foreign Affairs Committee, sir? | ||
| 100%. I mean, the day she went to Kashmir, Or to Pakistan and to Kashmir without any type of jurisdiction or any type of support from the State Department. | ||
| She put the entire nation's national security at risk. | ||
| Outside of that, she shows no allegiance to the integrity of this country's safety or anything else. | ||
| The only reason she would be put on this committee is to Capitulate to giving this country security away. | ||
| One of her comeback points is that she's particularly informed. | ||
| She's perfect to sit on foreign affairs because of her time as a refugee, coming from a war-torn country, living in refugee camps. | ||
| She has a special set of perspectives that she brings to this. | ||
| One, do you think that's a legitimate argument? | ||
| And what do you think folks in her district think, sir? | ||
| I think the folks in our district have no clue how the global affects the local. | ||
| And I think that that could be said for a lot of people across the entire country and on the Republican side as well. | ||
| Yeah, she does have a special set of skill sets and perspectives. | ||
| They're globalist skill sets and perspectives. | ||
| She's a puppet of the globalist establishment. | ||
| So she knows she can operate very well in that context because she serves as a As a puppet in that way in her political position here in Minnesota. | ||
| And on the world stage in this entire political theater, that's who she is. | ||
| So she feels perfectly comfortable putting her resume out there in that way. | ||
| But it has nothing to do with the safety of this country, the prosperity of this country, or the security of this country at all. | ||
| It's about her. And it's about this sort of metropolitan, omnisexual, transhuman movement that they can use a black woman or a refugee or a Somali or interracially married or whatever it is to justify the whole scam. | ||
| We've had a couple of shots to make that argument at the ballot box and to make it with people of the district there in Minneapolis. | ||
| For better or for worse, that's failed. | ||
| She's been reelected. | ||
| Do you think those issues and people putting forward her anti-Semitism, what she said about Israel, people putting forward, although I don't think they put it forward in a formal setting, this issue about Her immigration status and the situation with her brother. | ||
| Do you think, since the people in Minnesota and Minneapolis have had a chance to weigh and measure that, and they've sent her back, understanding some of these issues were out there, do you think that rises to the level that McCarthy ought to put this to a vote to the entire House to remove her? | ||
| It's very different. Her case is different than Solwell's. | ||
| And shifty shift. | ||
| Those have to do with security clearances, intelligence, etc. | ||
| This is the removal just like MTG with her controversial views. | ||
| Do you think this is tick for tat or you think this is actually something that should be put to a vote when her own constituents knew most of this at the time they voted for, sir? | ||
| I'm a populist to boot, but When it comes to matters of national security, we have to first acknowledge that the common sense from the wide-body populace has been corrupted at the highest level, at the deepest level, by the media industrial complex and all the other vested interested parties. | ||
| So first, I don't even think the voters of Minnesota or CD5 who sent her back Have a good grasp on any of these issues. | ||
| I mean any of these issues. | ||
| The two top issues in Minneapolis were public safety and climate change. | ||
| I mean, you know, that speaks values. | ||
| And then later on, that was early on in the election cycle, but later on obviously became more centered around Roe v. | ||
| Wade. But, you know, these other greater considerations around foreign affairs, around globalism, around economics, none of that stuff is the common purview of the people, the voters there in our district. | ||
| So I don't think we've had a fair shot. | ||
| To vote down Ilhan Omar or not, and like you and I discuss all the time, a lot of that in large part is due to the Republican establishment. | ||
| I mean, I was railroaded by the establishment in the primary, by Cicely Davis. | ||
| Who is she? Who are these people? | ||
| They're the same people. | ||
| Cicely Davis is Ilhan Omar, so we would have had a loss either way if she had gotten in, and that's the cold-hearted truth. | ||
| In your mind, if she was on the Agriculture Committee or the Climate Change Committee or the Small Business Committee, you don't have a beef with that? | ||
| It's about her being on Foreign Affairs, given some of the things against her? | ||
| Or do you think she ought to be on no committees, like they threw MTG off all the committees? | ||
| Look, I think Ilhan Omar is working for an interest that has nothing to do with the American people. | ||
| She shouldn't be on any committee, but she certainly shouldn't be on any foreign affair committee. | ||
| That is beyond unacceptable, to say the least. | ||
| Well, I've got you. I want to go to two other topics. | ||
| One, there's a story out today about Kamala Harris. | ||
| You and I have talked about this a lot. | ||
| You've made this point both on other podcasts, your own writings, and on The War Room about Kamala Harris and difficulty with Kamala Harris having black men buy into her program, either as VP or even potential president. | ||
| Your thoughts? Well, first of all, I want to say that We will never win another election if we don't win the black and Hispanic vote, the black and Hispanic male vote. | ||
| Everybody out there who thinks there's some other path to victory, they're kidding themselves. | ||
| It's delusional. | ||
| We have to change the hearts and minds of the black and Hispanic male vote, Latino male vote. | ||
| It can be done. | ||
| It can be done. And we're already seeing that the impulse of the black man in America is shifting very quickly because our interests are not aligned with this administration. | ||
| It's not aligned with this entire post-World War II democratic liberal order ethos that's now turned into transhumanism and LGBTQism. | ||
| We see that it doesn't benefit the black man. | ||
| In fact, it's at the expense of the black man in many ways. | ||
| The only problem black men are truly having is that our outlook on politics is largely predicated on a story we've been sold by the same establishment that means to enslave us. | ||
| And in that, you know, our biggest problem are our institutions like the NAACP, who were proto-communist institutions from the word go. | ||
| Doesn't matter if they supported Martin Luther King, if they were there when the Civil Rights Act was passed. | ||
| None of that matters. At bottom, the NAACP has always been a communist organization. | ||
| That's the reality. | ||
| Now, whether or not the black man understands the institutional corruption in the history is something that needs to be worked out. | ||
| But that is where we have to start. | ||
| The black man has to hone in on which institutions are perpetrating the corruption against the value of their citizenship and their political position. | ||
| And Kamala Harris and Joe Biden are the top of the heap. | ||
| I mean, the only problem Kamala is having with getting the support of black men is that we always fall behind the LGBT, first of all, technocracy, the impulse towards global technocracy. | ||
| Then it's the LGBTQ. Then it's women. | ||
| Then it's black women. | ||
| Then it's immigrant women. | ||
| Then it's trans women. | ||
| That's the problem they're having with the black male vote, and they're not willing to change that. | ||
| So any conversation they're having about the black male vote is just a way to appease some echo of criticism that they've heard through the noise. | ||
| When would you expect to see that manifest itself? | ||
| If Blacks and Hispanic men are the key to the future, let's say, and when do you expect to see, or do you think the outreach, and it's got to go along lines of my next question about the Federal Reserve, that people have to start speaking about the economic interests here? | ||
| To get the attention of black men and Hispanic men? | ||
| Is this your contention? | ||
| And if that's it, what needs to be done? | ||
| And when would you see that manifested in poll numbers that you would see some shift? | ||
| Well, the first thing I would say is that the Republican Party, the Republican establishment, has to make a pathway for new voters to come in. | ||
| And in large part, the Republican establishment has served as controlled opposition In this fashion, they've let whatever amount of racial animus that still exists, or dividing lines that still exist, or the desire not to change the status quo along superficial dividing lines, we've allowed that to keep us from wandering in to places that have a vote for us to get. | ||
| But we don't want it. | ||
| You've got to ask yourself why. | ||
| Why is the focus of the RNC or the National Republican Establishment not to go into these places and make their pitch if they actually believe it's a better pitch? | ||
| And I think it is a better pitch. | ||
| The economic incentive is clear. | ||
| Not only the economic incentive, but the spiritual incentive, the social incentive, the political incentive. | ||
| There's a bunch of open seats in the Republican Party right now for party officers. | ||
| Black men could fill it. | ||
| The Democrats aren't going to let a bunch of black men walk into the DNC and start having a voice. | ||
| It's not even possible. | ||
| They don't even have the openings. | ||
| So all of the, you know, everything is there for it to happen. | ||
| Why aren't we doing it? | ||
| Where is the urgency? | ||
| We think there's another plan. | ||
| We think there's another route. But there is no other route. | ||
| We saw that in Atlanta. | ||
| We saw that in the runoff. | ||
| The Democrats, the yuppie white liberal, suburban moms, the LGBTQ, the Marxist professors, the black bourgeoisie, the technocrats, the omnisexual metropolitan, all of them lined up. | ||
| They raised $250 million for Herschel Walker. | ||
| The only thing you can do to combat that type of corporate political corruption and American buy-in from the people is to have a spiritual change. | ||
| You mean raise money for his opposition, not raise money for Herschel Walker? | ||
| Right, for his race. | ||
| To defeat him. | ||
| To defeat him, yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
They raised $250 million. | |
| No, they put $250 million up on Herschel Walker's head. | ||
| Black man. The only way you can defeat that is if you have a spiritual conversion, like a heart and mind conversion. | ||
| And yeah, the economics help you explain the matter, but we don't even want to go into those places. | ||
| We're like, oh, Atlanta's gone. | ||
| Oh, Minneapolis is done. | ||
| Oh, Philadelphia is done. | ||
| Well, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, and Atlanta are going to become everywhere else shortly. | ||
| That's the entire communist ethos is to spread. | ||
| Now, we were willing to accept that when we talked about the spread of radical Islam. | ||
| We're willing to accept that radical Islam means to spread as a strategy. | ||
| So does communism. That's how this whole country was lost in the first place. | ||
| We have to pick up our Bibles, go out and spread a ministry and reach out to those young black men. | ||
| Where's our charity? | ||
| Where's our charity organizations? | ||
| Christian charity organizations? | ||
| Tell black men, hey, these people mean to enslave you because it's true. | ||
| Why would we not take the truth out on the road and try and recruit? | ||
| Maybe we don't want to win. | ||
| We want to win. | ||
| Maybe the RNC doesn't want to win. | ||
| Maybe McCarthy and some of these other people who are establishment Republicans don't really want to win. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I have to ask myself at night as a person who ran, who really wants to win and who doesn't? | |
| But before I let you go, I've got to ask you about, when you talk about economic issues and the basic economic issues, this whole issue with debt ceiling, spending, all of it, there's a lot of discussion now that a couple of moderate Republicans, and we're going to talk about a guy named General Don Bacon here in a minute with Frankie Stocks, that a couple of moderate Republicans can team up with Democrats and to try to work something out on the debt ceiling. | ||
| What is your position since you've been at the forefront of singling out the Federal Reserve as one of the central problems in this country? | ||
| What is your current belief on the debt ceiling, Federal Reserve, and this spending crisis we have? | ||
| We can't raise the debt ceiling a single cent. | ||
| It's actually a matter of national security. | ||
| And the reason why I say that is, you know, sure, we have the GDP and we can protect the debt. | ||
| That's the one thing that people miss out on. | ||
| Our military is strong enough to protect the debt. | ||
| Nobody's calling in the debts except for the people who are actually working with those who mean to scam the American people for their tax money. | ||
| So they're calling in the debts and they're getting answers. | ||
| But if we want to tell all these people who we owe money to to go take a hike, we could do that. | ||
| We're strong enough to do that. | ||
| But that's not the point. | ||
| The point is the overall spirit of it says that the American working class citizen, the little guy, and his money, his tax money, his citizenship, the value of his citizenship, is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme for a bunch of elites. | ||
| And that is fundamentally un-American. | ||
| On a fundamental basis, it's un-American. | ||
| Now, if we want to talk about the economy as a whole and the fact that we are putting the economy in danger or the case of going into a recession or all of these other things, that's obvious. | ||
| But I'm talking about the spirit of it. | ||
| What does it say? It says radical materialism. | ||
| It says you people are not really people to us. | ||
| You're just inventory. That's not American. | ||
| There's nothing American about that. | ||
| The American people, the American working class citizens are not inventory. | ||
| They were bestowed inalienable rights by the one true God. | ||
| And a part of those rights are not to be scammed and used as cattle by a bunch of corrupt D.C. elites. | ||
| The debt ceiling can't go up a single penny. | ||
| Royce, I know you got a new podcast coming out. | ||
| I'll see your writings over in your sub stack and all your social media. | ||
| How do people get to you and follow more of this? | ||
| Because you're going to be a big voice in this debt ceiling fight, sir. | ||
| You can follow me on Getter. | ||
| You can follow me on True Social. | ||
| You can follow me on... I'm still on all the other social media platforms for now, although I was suspended from Twitter over the last three weeks, probably about three, four times. | ||
| Obviously, Substack as well. | ||
| And Free People Radio is set to launch January 6th. | ||
| We will be working with Getter to make sure all of that content is streamed and that all of the Getter audience is informed. | ||
| We'll also have that content available on BitChute and Rumble and the other platforms as well, as well as all the podcast platforms. | ||
| So I'm really excited about that. | ||
| Is that February 6th? | ||
| You said January 6th February 6th February 6 will be launching launching people radio and and my podcast Please call me crazy will be the the launch of that that on that day Thank you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
. | |
| Royce White, honored to have you on here. | ||
| Thank you, sir. Godspeed, brother. | ||
| Love you. Thank you. | ||
| Love you, too. Royce White. | ||
| Let's play a cold open. We've got Frankie Stocks, a national file. | ||
| Two more congressmen we want to talk about right here. | ||
| Let's go ahead and play the cold open and bring Frankie in. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, those are our options right there, and we have to have those dialogue. | |
| But our first primary focus should be to get the 20, enough of the 20 over to win outright within the party. | ||
| But if that doesn't work, there are discussions that we could have on committee ratios, rules changes, things like that. | ||
| And some of this could involve some Democrats voting present. | ||
| We're not voting. But those are the dialogue we're going to have to have at some point if these 20 people refuse to be part of the team and refuse to do what the voters ask them to do. | ||
| Right now, these 20 people think they're the only door that we have to walk through. | ||
| At some point, we're going to have to present another door and say, no, you're not the only game in town and find a different way to get to 218. | ||
| So why then, you believe? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Because there are a number of Senate Democrats who have been reluctant to embrace your candidacy. | |
| Are you worried about that? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Are you worried about the reluctance on your party? | |
| No. I have to focus on the voters of Arizona, the people I've known forever, the people I've actually worked for and will continue to work for, the people I want to go talk to this week, starting in Tucson, ending up in White River, Arizona. | ||
| Those are the people that really matter. | ||
| But you're not happy about it, I'm sure. | ||
| You would prefer that they supported you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Of course, but look, let's be honest. | |
| It's a very sticky situation. | ||
| You have, you know, a lot of members over there that have known each other forever. | ||
| It's a little insider's club. | ||
| They don't want to start, you know, messing around with their friends. | ||
| And, you know, we have time. | ||
| At the end of the day, what matters is I'm going to win because the voters of Arizona want to vote for me. | ||
| Have you discussed your candidacy with Leader Schumer or Senator Gary Peters? | ||
| I mean, they run the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee. | ||
| What did they tell you if you did speak with them? | ||
|
unidentified
|
We've been talking to them on a lot of other issues, a lot of legislative issues. | |
| We'll always have open line of communications, but we're not talking about this campaign, not at this point. | ||
| But we're not afraid to talk to anybody, and we'll be reaching out to them and reaching out to all other political organizations so they know we're a strong campaign we're running. | ||
| Okay, Frankie Stocks joins us. | ||
| Frankie, National File, you've been all over Davos, you've been all over the World Economic Forum, globalism, all the globalists. | ||
| You've got two guys, Don Bacon there at first, who was the biggest voice going out during the five days that changed America when the Magnificent Six dug in hard about removing the cartel head. | ||
| Speaker McCarthy, he was a guy going on TV all the time saying, this has got to end, this is ridiculous. | ||
| He's now in the middle of the debt ceiling. | ||
| He's one of the guys, they're talking about a moderate, you know, I don't know how, you know, General Bacon is from the Nebraska, the district guy in Nebraska. | ||
| I don't know how the folks in Nebraska have put this guy back in. | ||
| Gallego is now getting momentum. | ||
| That was the first day they were chopping up a little bit. | ||
| He's getting real momentum running against Kristen Simmons, just a poll out. | ||
| I think he's At like 40 % in a three-way race against Cary Lake and Sinema, and Sinema's in the teens. | ||
| Here's what I understand. You've been doing reporting on this, the Humpty Dumpty Institute. | ||
| I want you to explain what it is. | ||
| It's got money from Epstein's brother, Mark Epstein. | ||
| It's got some sketchy, shady guys on the board and the founders. | ||
| We're going to put a chart up in a second. | ||
| It may take CCP money. | ||
| And it's got a whole list of these Democrat and Republican on the Congressional Advisory Committee, and we just picked out the two who are probably most prominent right now. | ||
| What is going on? | ||
| Who is this group? | ||
| What do they actually do? | ||
| And why would so many prominent politicians want to be associated with these characters, from Epstein's brother To potentially the CCP and some other guys' founders and it looks like donors who it's kind of hard to really figure out what they're trying to do. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Frankie Stokes. You know, Steve, the Humpty Dumpty Institute, they've been at this for over 20 years and they started out sort of peddling their influence and interjecting themselves into foreign policy discussions at the United Nations 20 years ago. | |
| Since then, along with a lot of the other globalist, radical left-wing elements, they've shifted to China, and they are in full league with the Chinese Communist Party, with the People's Liberation Army, with the Taihe Institute, which is basically Xi Jinping's version of the Council on Foreign Relations. | ||
| They're in full league with these guys, and they're peddling influence all over the world. | ||
| They've ensnared several members of Congress, two who you just mentioned, Interestingly enough, this week, another Humpty Dumpty Institute guy, Adam Schiff, announced that he'd be running for Senate. | ||
| He was a Humpty Dumpty Institute congressional advisory board member, just like Bacon and Gallego, until just a few years ago. | ||
| So this is a group that's deeply penetrated Congress, and they have deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| They make introductions of politicians all over the globe. | ||
| And they facilitate the China First agenda. | ||
| They're pushing the Belt and Road Initiative. | ||
| Hang on. We want you to hold through the break, but I got to ask you, is it a concern of yours that you have a guy at Schiff that was basically the minority chair under Paul Ryan and Nunez and then took over the intelligence community or the committee and led the president's impeachment? | ||
| Is that a big issue for him to be associated with something like the Humpty Dumpty Institute? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Absolutely, Steve. That should concern anyone. | |
| I mean, this is a group that is directly in league with the Chinese Communist Party, with its Taihe Institute, with the People's Liberation Army, and its leadership has engaged in militaristic Maoist rituals with the People's Liberation Army on the Chinese mainland. | ||
| Since its founding, it was funded by Mark Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein's brother. | ||
| This is a shady organization, is the only way to describe it, and they have a number of congressmen under their influence. | ||
| Hang on for a second. We're going to take a short break. | ||
| Any group that's got Mark Epstein and President Xi as the financiers has got to be looked at harder. | ||
| Okay, short commercial break. Back with Frankie Stocks from National File. | ||
| We've got our own Natalie Winters going to join us. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And of course, Dr. Bradley Thayer, all next in The War Room. | |
| Bye! | ||
| Welcome back. We got Frankie Stocks that kind of is one of the tip of the spears over at National File on everything, all the globalists, including the world economy foreign. | ||
| Frankie, I want to put up this chart because I don't understand. | ||
| I want you to explain to particularly this group because you got Mark Epstein lent him $100,000 or donated $100,000 a couple of years ago. | ||
| You got all these other kind of sketchy individuals that have put money in or loaned money in, but then you've got This very prominent institution directly associated with Xi in the Chinese Communist Party, which I think has got to get anybody's attention, particularly when you have people like Schiff that was head of the Intelligence Committee. | ||
| You got guys like General Bacon, a highly decorated Air Force general that now represents Nebraska, has become a pretty prominent voice in the moderate wing of our party. | ||
| And you've got guys like Diego, who is going to be, you know, he's going to be a prominent player because he's taken on Sinema and maybe even Carrie Lake out in Arizona. | ||
| So walk us through, put this chart up and walk us through, what are we looking at and what's this group that's in the middle that you talk about and what's their relationship to She? | ||
|
unidentified
|
The Taihe Institute, they're functioning as Xi's Council on Foreign Relations. | |
| They exist to spread Chinese communism and Chinese dominance throughout the world. | ||
| They are a direct arm of the People's Liberation Army and Xi's CCP. They are even operating research centers, which are effectively Chinese military outposts, Chinese philosophical military outposts in the United States and Germany. | ||
| And the Humpty Dumpty Institute's reporting directly to them. | ||
| And when they do, they're reporting to them how through their public-private partnerships all over the world and through their parallel influence groups, how they are advancing the Chinese agenda, how they're creating opportunities for Chinese businesses, Chinese state-owned, state-affiliated businesses. | ||
| They are reporting how the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative for CCP economic dominance is playing out. | ||
| And this is through their league of affiliations. | ||
| Through their personnel, they are linked to FARC. They're linked to left-wing terror networks through South America. | ||
| They are linked back to the former Soviet Union. | ||
| This is a really nasty group, and they've seriously twisted web all over the globe. | ||
| And as we were speaking in the last segment, Bacon, Gallego, They're both acting as congressional advisors. | ||
| And Bacon actually went on a trip to Uzbekistan with the Humpty Dumpty Institute where he met with their brutal president who is operating child slave labor camps in cotton fields under the threat of death. | ||
| And under the, this is a direct quote, the president of Uzbekistan says that when children and when farmers refuse to work, he will strip the slate from their roofs. | ||
| He will take everything that they have. | ||
| He will destroy them and he will give them the death penalty. | ||
| I mean, this is the brutal CCP aligned leader that HDI is brokering meetings for Don Bacon. | ||
| Explain to people, because what's odd about them, they haven't raised a ton of money. | ||
| I mean, most of these organizations, as Natalie said, are sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars and spreading cash everywhere. | ||
| They're procuring the fact that they've never raised a ton of money. | ||
| And in fact, when Epstein's brother gave the $100,000, that was one of the bigger donations they had for that year. | ||
| Why would they have prominent congressmen on a Congressional Advisory Board if they really don't have money to put to work? | ||
| Do they do these partnerships? | ||
| Do they put deals together? | ||
| Do they sponsor trips for these congressmen overseas? | ||
| I don't see what the incentive is. | ||
| To have these prominent congressmen associated with something that, when you look at it, you look at your analysis, it just looks sketchy and kind of dangerous. | ||
| So what attracts these congressmen, do you believe, in your reporting, to a group like this? | ||
|
unidentified
|
You know, HDI, they market themselves as a global middleman, as a global power broker, and they set up acquaintances, they set up meetings. | |
| They do facilitate trips all over the world. | ||
| So when they come in and they set up their Congressional Advisory Board, they suddenly link this congressman up with interests all over the globe, whether they be business interests, whether they be political interests, whether they be any other form of intel interest. | ||
| This is a group that, due to their PLA connections and their connections in Uzbekistan's foreign policy field, foreign policy sectors of their government, They definitely appear to have some very strange intel ties. | ||
| And at National File, with our partners of British Texan Research, we've really dug into this group, and they are shady. | ||
| They've never raised a lot of money, but they've spread a lot of influence, and they have manipulated a lot of foreign policy, and that's what they openly cast themselves as doing. | ||
| They set it up, and they let it play out. | ||
| They're used as a vessel, sort of for their CCP tie-hay So to speak. | ||
| Frankie, how do people get to you on social media? | ||
| How do they get over to the National File to look at more of your reporting and particularly get that chart and make sure they go through it? | ||
| We're going to put it up all on our chat rooms. | ||
|
unidentified
|
How do they get to you? Check out NationalFile.com. | |
| We've got mountains of great reporting on the Humpty Dumpty Institute over there. | ||
| And you can find me on social media across platforms, Twitter, Getter, Gab, Truth Social, at Stocks76. | ||
| S-T-O-C-K-E-S-7-6. | ||
| Frankie, I gotta ask you before you go. | ||
| We had the Omar segment. | ||
| I know you've done a lot of reporting about Minneapolis. | ||
| What are your thoughts? Quickly, give me your thoughts on Omar. | ||
| Should she be stripped of foreign affairs, sir? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh, I absolutely think that she should. | |
| It is outlandish to me to have anyone who came from a terror-ridden third-world nation like Somalia on the On foreign policy commissions in the first place, the ties there are just too great. | ||
| You throw in the married to brother issue, throw in the practical Sharia colonization within her district, and it is truly a national security risk. | ||
| I agree with everything that Royce White had to say about it. | ||
| Frankie Stocks, thank you very much for joining us. | ||
| Appreciate it. Keep up the good work. | ||
| Thank you, Steve. Natalie Winters. | ||
| Natalie, you specialize in this, and here's what the audience got to understand. | ||
| These NGOs, it's virtually totally unregulated, right? | ||
| You see something like Humpty Dumpty, right? | ||
| The thing you say, hey, there's something sketchy here. | ||
| The people associated, who they're taking money from, where they're setting up trips. | ||
| Give me your overall assessment, because you've kind of specialized in this. | ||
| These NGOs, and you had the guys at Heritage did the 35 NGOs that are driving, literally with government money, driving illegal aliens, not just up through the border, but up through the rest of the United States. | ||
| Talk to me for a second about your perspective of the NGOs and their relationships to how power is really disseminated in the nation's capital. | ||
| Sure, I think the NGOs are really kind of the foot soldiers of this broader movement if you want to kind of look at the disseminators of it being the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, right? | ||
| Because the globalist movement is diffuse in the sense that these people don't really believe at least in a centralization of power from a country perspective, right? | ||
| But in order to actually get some of their policies, their broader agendas, In place, they have to have some way, some overarching way that connects whether it's not just state to state, but country to country. | ||
| and be able to fund it and like for example the Humpty Dumpty Institute at least with what you know Frankie was reporting shows you how you kind of have the key players right the Chinese Communist Party financiers tied to sort of larger globalist movements nine times out of ten the Gates Foundation is somehow involved but I think it just really goes back to sort of my Central thesis, which is the concept of pattern recognition, right? | ||
| It's the idea that lightning doesn't strike the same place twice. | ||
| And when you see the same people who are funding, whether it's critical race theory initiatives in the classrooms, or the same people who are funding the climate change campaign, or the same people who are funding the initiatives, to take grass-fed beef and normal food off of your table and substitute it with plant-based alternatives. | ||
| And these are the same people who are also funding pandemic prevention while also funding the cures to these so-called pandemics. | ||
| I think it really is just one large conflict of interest where these people are often exploiting whatever the crisis is of the day, as the World Economic Forum calls it, the poly crises, to get more power. | ||
| So that's why you see the same people rearing their ugly heads, irrespective of what the problem actually is. | ||
| So that's why these NGOs, they're kind of shapeshifters in the sense that whatever the issue was of the day, that's what they focus on. | ||
| And they sort of have these reserve troops Of people who are on their advisory boards, people who are on their payroll, who will kind of go out and stump for them and push any agenda. | ||
| So the NGOs, and unfortunately with the way financial disclosures are in the United States or the other countries that these entities are often headquartered, it's very lax. | ||
| So they thrive on the secrecy, right? | ||
| These 501c3s don't have to disclose Who their donors are. | ||
| So that means that the Chinese Communist Party could be donating and no one's gonna know. | ||
| So it sort of goes back to the other area that I cover, which is, you know, the idea of CCP infiltration in this country. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And it's basically all about just distorting reality. | |
| And here you got a witch's brew. | ||
| You got, you know, you got Epstein's brother. | ||
| You've got some sketchy, looks like Middle Eastern connections. | ||
| You've got Central Asian connections. | ||
| You got the CCP, one of the more prominent. | ||
| It's just, but I'm saying if you go to a number of these two, you'll find many of the connective tissue. | ||
| This does make sense. I'm a little pressed for time, but I got to go. | ||
| Natalie Winters, as you know, is steady Eddie, always unflappable, as I call her. | ||
| I don't often see a three alarm tweet. | ||
| from Natalie Winters, and I caught one today. | ||
| So I had to get you on here. | ||
| I go, wow, what's the bee in her bonnet? | ||
| This is pretty important. | ||
| Tell us what you've identified today. | ||
| I want to make sure the audience at least gets a taste of it, and we're going to drill down on more of it in the days to come. | ||
| Sure. Well, I think that the Atlantic Magazine called your producer Cameron unflappable in their write-up, but I will take that as a compliment nonetheless. | ||
| But this story is I think a bombshell in the sense that we should be internalizing it is the equivalent of the World Health Organization and their pandemic treaty. | ||
| This is kind of the United Nations approach to misinformation in that context. | ||
| In other words, they want to take away sovereignty from the United States, from our government, and put it to kind of the level above, right? | ||
| Extract one level up and have really the United Nations be able to determine what exactly constitutes misinformation. | ||
| So they've launched what's called a convention on countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes. | ||
| Now I know that's a mouthful, but if you really drill down and you read the document or at least the draft document, It really has to do with people who share information that the UN would deem misinformation. | ||
| In some cases, it's people who promote ideological hatred or political hatred. | ||
| People who also promote, they say, terrorism or trying to overthrow the government. | ||
| But as we've seen, those terms are often misappropriated and weaponized against people who dare to defy The globalist kind of world order, and I think the key point to focus on here, which we'll get into later, but is how China is actually trying to shape this treaty, this convention, and they've actually put forth a resolution to be added to this document, and I'll read it briefly. | ||
| Because it really is scary. | ||
| And they say they want to criminalize people who share false information that could result in serious social disorder, including but not limited to information related to natural and human caused disasters. | ||
| In other words, to me, that means they're talking about a lab leak in a potentially future pandemic or artificially created natural disaster. | ||
| But that is right out of the CCP's mouth, this concept of social disorder. | ||
| That's how kind of the new term that they're going to be using to silence us. | ||
| And it's really scary that the UN It's actually partnering not just with member states like China, but also private companies, including Meta, the American Chamber of Commerce, Amazon Web Services, and Microsoft. | ||
| They're part of the ad hoc committee advising the UN on the formulation of this committee. | ||
| So this is a really big story that is worth paying attention to. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's up on warroom.org if you want to read it. | |
| What is the timing of all this? | ||
| When's this convention? Just walk me through a critical path here. | ||
| Sure, so the effort to roll this out began in December 2019. | ||
| That was when the UN voted to kind of get the groundwork going to establish this convention, and it'll be formalized. | ||
| So the document, what I'm speaking about now is a draft, but it'll be totally done. | ||
| The deliberative process completed in September of 2024. | ||
| So they're really taking their time. | ||
| I would argue nefariously to make sure that they maximize the power that they can get using these so-called man-made or natural human disasters to sort of broaden their purview over what they can and can't censor. | ||
| Natalie, how do people get to you over at War Room and how do they get to your social media? | ||
| I'm Natalie G. Winters on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook, and of course Getter. | ||
| And you can go to warroom.org to keep up with the latest stories I'm breaking. | ||
| Thank you very much, Natalie. | ||
| Appreciate it. This is a big one. | ||
| We're going to be all over it. I want to go to Dr. | ||
| Bradley Thayer. Dr. Thayer, thank you for joining us. | ||
| Look, you had this, and you got an amazing piece up in Epoch Times, and I want to address that, but no sooner Have they been hammering and begging for and saying they must have battle tanks? | ||
| Then all of a sudden he flips last night and says, we also need, oh, by the way, we need F-16s and we need rockets and we need long-range missiles. | ||
| And lo and behold, Lockheed says, hey, we're going to ramp up production anyway, even without a purchase order. | ||
| So, Dr. | ||
| Thayer, how does this... | ||
| What is going on here? | ||
| How does it impact the national security of the United States of America, not Ukraine? | ||
| Because I think what our audience is most concerned about, as we've talked here now for the last half hour, is the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| In particular, we're concerned about Taiwan, the defense of Taiwan, sir. | ||
| Steve, it's great to be with you again. | ||
| The United States has got, obviously, global obligations that it has to meet. | ||
| Taiwan, of course, is first and foremost of that because it's in the sights of the Chinese Communist Party right now. | ||
| What we need to do is have a conventional deterrent for Taiwan. | ||
| Conventional deterrence really relies on three things. | ||
| One of which is going to be the size of your military. | ||
| How many ships, submarines does your Navy have? | ||
| How big is the Army, Air Force, the Marine Corps? | ||
| Secondly, what's the arsenal like? | ||
| Are you going to be able to fight a high-intensity warfare against China Or not, if you're not able to have a defense industry- But hang on, but hang on, but hang on, hang on, Dr. | ||
| Thayer, whoa, whoa, whoa, hang on. I thought we were paying, we almost spent a trillion dollars a year on defense, national security, $840 billion, think what the NDA says, but people know they got stuff stuck everywhere else. | ||
| If you round it up, it's close to a trillion dollars, you agree? | ||
| I thought our military doctrine was two and a half wars simultaneously, or at least they pulled back at least two wars. | ||
| I thought we've been paying for the last 50 or 60 years ever since President Reagan, or even before then, I think since World War II, haven't we been paying for a doctrine that lays out Two to two and a half wars simultaneously. | ||
| So why should this be a concern of yours now, since we're just shipping some weapons and 30 Abram tanks? | ||
| Don't we have massive inventory and we got more than enough, like three times as much to defend the Straits of Taiwan in Taiwan, sir? | ||
| In the Cold War, we had a standard of two and a half major wars. | ||
| That is a war against the Soviets, a war against the Chinese, and a Vietnam. | ||
| We'd be able to do simultaneously. | ||
| Now, whether we met that or not is another issue, but that was the standard that we wanted to have an army large enough to deal with that, an Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps. | ||
| Today, that is not the standard. | ||
| Today, we'd be hard pressed to do one of those, Steve, as you well know. | ||
| So, what we need to do is not only have a military that's strong enough, but we need to have a defense base that's going to be able to supply Our military in a high-intensity war, Steve, that's not fighting in Iraq, that's not fighting in Afghanistan, that's the Hertgen Forest, right? | ||
| Around Okinawa, between April and June of 1945, the Navy had about 36 ships sunk and about 368 damaged, okay? | ||
| In those months around Okinawa, due to kamikazes, largely, the Japanese kamikazes. | ||
| In World War II, of course, we had an industrial base that could handle that, although even Okinawa was testing that with those losses as Nimitz was terribly worried, right? | ||
| No more Okinawas. | ||
| The Navy can't do that. | ||
| So around Taiwan, could we suffer 36 losses, 36 vessels sunk and 368 damage? | ||
| Well, we only have about 280 ships in the entire Navy presently, and that's of all types. | ||
| So, in order to fight high-intensity warfare, you've got to have a military that's primed to do it and an industrial base that can support it. | ||
| And we're just not there. | ||
| Now, sending things to Ukraine makes that situation worse by far. | ||
| But it was a bad situation before Ukraine ever came up. | ||
| So, you know, it's a key issue of tremendous concern. | ||
| If you're going to get involved in a war against I want everybody to go to see this piece right now, and we'll get you back on a drill down more. | ||
| But correct me if I'm wrong, the Navy Secretary tweeted out a couple weeks ago that if we continue to arm Ukraine at the rate we're going to arm it, we will not have munitions for the fleet in six months. | ||
| And immediately they freaked out and they took the tweet down. | ||
| Was he speaking the truth when he said that in your professional opinion, Dr. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Bradley Thayer? He is, Steve. | |
| A defense of Taiwan is going to consume munitions by the tens of thousands in terms of what the Navy is able to produce. | ||
| Essentially standard missiles, for example, and the derivatives in that family. | ||
| In terms of anti-radiation missiles, in terms of air-to-air missiles, we're going to be in the tens of many tens of thousands. | ||
| It's going to be consumed instantaneously, right away. | ||
| within weeks and months. | ||
| We don't have an arsenal that can supply that now. | ||
| So it's nice that they're ramping up, but they have a long way to go in order to deal with that. | ||
| The Navy, as you know, can't make the vessels obviously in the way it once did because we've got too few yards. | ||
| Dr. Thayer, we've got to bounce. | ||
| Real quickly, how do people get to the article? | ||
| How do they get to your writings? It's the Epoch Times on the 25th of January and Center for Security Policy and then Bradley Thayer at Getter and Truth. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Steve, thanks. Thank you, Dr. | |
| Thayer. We'll have you back on and go into more depth tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. | ||
| Come back to the war room. | ||
| We will be as lit as we were today. |
Export Selection