Feb. 9, 2023 - Bannon's War Room
47:39
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 going to 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. | |
| War Room. Battleground. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Okay, it's Thursday, 9 February, Year of Alert, 2023. | ||
| We've got a very special hour ahead of us. | ||
| Vivek Ramaswamy is going to join us. | ||
| An incredibly powerful talk down there. | ||
| We're going to get into all that, but given the hour, I had so much to go through this morning. | ||
| I wanted to get him back on one of the evening shows, was Ben Harnwell. | ||
| Ben, just in summary, the jets mean a whole different type of warfare, and you left the morning show by talking about, hey, you don't think they're going to be around in six months, etc. | ||
| Is that the thinking in Europe? | ||
| Is that what you're coming up with? | ||
| Because they're dug in now and they're saying, hey, we can hold them off in eastern Ukraine and we're going to pivot to go liberate Crimea. | ||
| All we need is fighter aircraft. | ||
| What's your assessment? Well, to riff off what I said earlier on in the morning show, Steve, is that the Western governments have so hyped The moral necessity to give Ukraine every aid conceivable in its war to defend itself against Russia. | ||
| It's not very difficult because they did it on the basis of moral necessity. | ||
| They never explained, as you said, tirelessly and repeatedly. | ||
| They never made the case in no capital in the West. | ||
| Did the government go and explain to its people the necessity to that country of why its interests were at stake here? | ||
| It was just presented as a morally necessary manoeuvre, almost as if we were compelled to go to the defence of a fellow NATO country. | ||
| I mean, that was the level of the imperative here. | ||
| So how when the war is, you know, the war room has basically said for a whole year that it's going to be very difficult and impossible for Ukraine to win this. | ||
| So given that reality, given the fact that the economic is now starting to bite and peoples are starting to show their dissatisfaction in the opinion parts and to show this very clearly, How do the governments, right, have a situation to this extent, talk themselves off the ledge? | ||
| How do they get back into the window, back into the building, and talk like reasonable adults? | ||
| That's very difficult for them. | ||
| So one of the ways I would suggest that they're going to try to do this is respond to realities on the ground, which is why I think, considering that President Macron has said this explicitly, and Biden in his more or less sort of semi-senile mode has said out of both sides of his mouth that they won't use nuclear weapons if Russia does so on Ukraine, | ||
| which is really... | ||
| Of the two ways this war ends, one of them is in nuclear Armageddon, and the other is that the war will peter out because one of the two sides can't afford it anymore, or both sides can't afford it anymore, and therefore they need to at some point go to the negotiating table. | ||
| If it is the latter, which is the negotiating table and not nuclear Armageddon, then Given the hype that the Western governments have put into this, they really need to say, well, you know, this is the situation. | ||
| The reality is that following the Russia-Spring offensive... | ||
| The polling you talked about this morning shows you the reality. | ||
| The reality is that people now understand the sacrifice they have to make for this. | ||
| The polling in Germany is shocking. | ||
| Only 45 % of the people would come to the defense of a NATO ally. | ||
| Forget a non-NATO ally like Ukraine, but a NATO ally. | ||
| This is what I keep saying about the NATO treaty. | ||
| You don't really have the buy-in of the people. | ||
| This is why they continue to say, hey, we can't get to 2 % of GDP. I've sat in a room with these guys. | ||
| If we can't do that, our populations would throw us out of office. | ||
| And I go, well, this is the point. | ||
| It's not really an alliance. | ||
| It's a protectorate. And the American people, and this is why this resolution that Gates is putting forward now to take funding of this down to zero, the conscripts, the reason I'm putting these conscripts up, there was a poll put up in The Guardian two weeks ago, three weeks ago, that showed that, I don't know, The biggest number in history of German young men are becoming conscientious objectors. | ||
| They don't want to volunteer for the military. | ||
| So that's why they've got to go to basically the British Royal Navy's press gangs shortly to get people to sign up for this. | ||
| But I want to go to Georgia Maloney, because for a lot of people, she has been quite a disappointment in the fact that she's bought in so heavily into the French-German, the Franco-German defense pact here. | ||
| They went to the city of London. | ||
| They went and saw the king. | ||
| Then he went to Brussels. | ||
| Then they go to a private dinner with Macron, and then they drop the bomb that Schultz flew over and joined him for dinner. | ||
| They elbowed her out. | ||
| Why is Georgia Maloney, who's really bought into this better than anybody, why is she the odd man out here? | ||
| Why is Italy the odd man out? | ||
| Steve, can I answer that question? | ||
| But can I just respond, if I may, because you were talking about the German situation. | ||
| Sure. These things, the political reality on the ground is fundamental here to how this war finishes, right? | ||
| The political reality on the ground in the Western... | ||
| States that are supporting Ukraine, that's where this war is going to be won or lost. | ||
| It's not on the battlefield in Ukraine, right? | ||
| Here's another poll. Having mentioned the German poll earlier, right? | ||
| Here's another poll. This is from Gallup. | ||
| This was out today, Steve. 50 % of Americans have told Gallup that they're financially worse off now than they were 12 months ago. | ||
| Last year. So this is in the United States, and the economic realities are starting to kick in. | ||
| And when economic realities kick in, political realities won't be that far behind, and therefore military realities will follow sooner or later after the political realities. | ||
| Both the German situation and the American domestic situation are broad of what's happening here in Italy as well to come out to Giorgio Malone. | ||
| There's been criticism, as we did suggest yesterday, here in Italy over the lack of visit by the globalist pop star To Rome, he didn't come and there was criticism of that because it obviously illustrates a certain | ||
|
unidentified
|
lack of importance for... | |
| Okay, we're going to get back to Ben here in a moment. | ||
| Let's go ahead and play. By the way, so here's the update, is that Maloney, who has bought into this entire, you know, situation in Ukraine, and, you know, against her kind of more populist nationalist And what she really came to power about has really bought into the entire EU, NATO, Ben's back. | ||
| So I understand why he might not want to go, Ben Harnwell, particularly since the first cancellation he's had was the cancellation of this music festival, which is kind of a humiliation. | ||
| They didn't even want to have his video canceled. And that was in your face. | ||
| But I don't understand why she's not invited to Paris with Macron and the Germans unless she should get the message that, hey, this really is a Franco-German, the NATO is a Franco-German deal, and so is the EU is a Franco-German deal. | ||
| Ben Harnwell. You know, because, and that's a good point, I would add to that, and now this is sort of speculation territory. | ||
| Given what we spoke about yesterday, about the Seymour Hersh thesis, that it was the Americans who, or let's be specific here, the Biden regime, that bombed the Nord Stream pipelines, and given the fact that Georgia Maloney has given every indication possible of wanting to walk in lockstep with the US military industrial complex, | ||
| Let's not forget this thing was organised very, very recently, the Zelensky visit. | ||
| It's possible, right, I'm speculating, possible, that the German, that Olaf Scholz didn't want her there. | ||
| He might have thought she was in on this, this plot, because let's not forget this was an act of, you know, let's not exaggerate, but let's not underestimate, this was an unprovoked Act of warfare by the United States on what is Germany's vital national security interest, that is, its access to energy. | ||
| And America did that, blew those pipes up exactly because it didn't want Germany drifting off into the Russian sphere of influence. | ||
| So, it's possible. | ||
| By the way, the underlying polling would show you that Jake Sullivan and this guy has understood that back in December 2021. | ||
| If you take the polling out of Germany today, they know that there's very little support, or it's on the margin support for NATO, and that's before anybody has to really pay the price for it. | ||
| I just want to make sure the Seymour Hersh piece has not been... | ||
| That has not been independently verified, although Mike Lee in the Senate said, hey, he's asked a bunch of Senate colleagues, has anybody been briefed? | ||
| And of course, because of the fact they used Navy divers and didn't use special warfare, you did need a gang of eight briefing beforehand. | ||
| So that's still very controversial, but I agree with you. | ||
| Ben, we've got to bounce. | ||
| But you're reporting on this. | ||
| Your analysis of this has been incredible. | ||
| And people should know, now that the Gates resolution is up, this is going to get a lot more heated because there's a lot of people here in the country, just like there are a lot of people in Germany, saying, what are we doing here? | ||
| Is this helping the Ukrainian people? | ||
| I mean, is your assessment right now of the Ukrainian people, are you still with Mersheimer? | ||
| This is a great power struggle and they're being led into the charnel house? | ||
| As Mersheimer at University of Chicago said, they're being led down the primrose path to their destruction, sir? | ||
| That guy needs to get some kind of Nobel Prize for his foresight because he was onto this in 2014. | ||
| Every single word that he said has come to pass. | ||
| And to show you how morally corrupt the globalist policy infrastructure is, they've given him no credit for being right. | ||
| All they've done now is moved on a dime to criticizing and accusing him of being Putin's stooge, a Putin asset. | ||
| And all this guy had ever did was say, if we do this, Russia will respond like that. | ||
| Yes, to answer your question, I'm 100 % behind John Shimer's thesis that Ukraine walked down the primrose path with its declared intention to join NATO and the European Union. | ||
| What has changed, and I indicated this yesterday on the show, is the reason for that. | ||
| I had always assumed that this war was engineered by NATO to seek a post-Cold War relevance, because NATO is obviously a product of the Cold War. | ||
| When the Cold War isn't around anymore, two decades, three decades on, what is the purpose of NATO? So I thought it had manufactured this war in order to To have new relevance. | ||
| And of course, it does have new relevance. | ||
| Let's not deny that, that it didn't have this time 12 months ago. | ||
| But merging the Meir Shreimer thesis that this war was manufactured with the Seymour Hersh thesis, and looking at the dates that are there in that article, I would speculate That this war was engineered not to give NATO a new purpose, but simply because the United States wanted to take out those gas pipelines to Germany for two reasons. | ||
| It didn't want Germany to be too much under Russian influence, because it was a very vulnerable position being dependent on Russian energy. | ||
| And the second reason is that I think it fancied itself as being an energy provider to continental Europe. | ||
| And both of those things have now come to pass. | ||
| You quite correctly said that this is a thesis. | ||
| It's been unverified, Seymour Hershey's article. | ||
| But if I might close with this recollection, and those with longer memories will remember this, I think it was the Obama White House regime that was caught wiretapping Angela Merkel's chancellery at the espionage level. | ||
| So it's not beyond Americans, you know, I bow to no one for my love of the United States. | ||
| However, its military-industrial complex is not synonymous with the United States as a people and as a culture. | ||
| And I think it's reasonable to criticize what the CIA does around the world. | ||
| Without any disrespect to the American people. | ||
| I hope I can tread that line and make it clear why I'm coming from there. | ||
| And it is clear that the Americans were spying on Germany under Obama. | ||
| So I don't think it's beyond... | ||
| A NATO ally, by the way. | ||
| So I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility that the United States took out these gas pipelines. | ||
| Because it certainly wasn't Russia. | ||
| How do people get to War Room Roam? | ||
|
unidentified
|
How do they get to your content? Thank you so much, Steve. | |
| Yep, I'm exclusively on Getter as my preferred platform, simply because the quality of the social engagement and interaction is unmatched on any other platform. | ||
| And if you just, folks simply want to go to my surname, Harnwell, and they're at Harnwell on Getter, and I'll be pushing out this. | ||
| And I put out a great story earlier on, Steve, I'll just give a quick mention of it, to do with the FBI that weaponized data collection, privacy smashing armor of the federal government. | ||
| They've astonishingly produced a memo less than a month ago where they basically accused what they call a term I'm unfamiliar with, but radicalized traditionalist Catholics as being a security concern for the state. | ||
| So if folks want to read more about that, go to my Getter feed at Harnwell. | ||
| That's my hometown that the FBI field office is in, and that is the—I am sure about the little church that my parents started with some Benedictine monks that say the Latin Mass when the— Vatican allowed it back, I think, in the late 70s, early 80s. | ||
| So, no, that's very close to home. | ||
| And I'm sure it's not totally unrelated that that's Steve Bannon. | ||
| That was the parish that he grew up in. | ||
| So, thank you. We're going to have a lot more on that in the days to come. | ||
| Ben Harnwell, thank you so much. | ||
| Appreciate you coming on. Thanks, Steve. | ||
| God bless. Okay. | ||
| I'm going to play a cold open. | ||
| It's going to take a couple minutes. It's pretty extraordinary. | ||
| I want everybody to see this start to finish, and then I'm going to bring in the speaker next. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We have undermined America's greatest geopolitical asset of all, and that is not our nuclear arsenal. | |
| It is our moral standing on the global stage. | ||
| That's how you get Disney, who two years ago will say can't shoot a film in the state of Georgia if Georgia passes an anti-abortion statute. | ||
| That says it cannot abide a new law in Florida that prevents public school teachers from teaching six-year-olds about transgenderism and gender identity, but will go in the same period to film Mulan in the Shenzhen province of China, literally ground zero of the Uyghur human rights crisis, where there are over one million religious minorities enslaved in concentration camps, | ||
|
unidentified
|
subject to forced sterilization, communist indoctrination, and worse, without saying a peep, Until the very end of the movie, you could still see it in the credits today, where they say, we thank the local authorities for allowing us the privilege of filming here. | |
| Reminds me of those trees in Harlem. | ||
| That was what Disney got out of that trade. | ||
| But it turns out every other company is doing the same thing. | ||
| Nike, BlackRock, Airbnb, JPMorgan Chase, the NBA. Why do they do it? | ||
| The answer is actually really simple. | ||
| It comes down to money. | ||
| Because if you're the CCP, you build a great Chinese wall that prevents you from entering the Chinese market if you criticize the CCP. But if you criticize the United States or hamstring its economy with those emissions caps, we will roll out the red carpet. | ||
| And so companies do what companies do. | ||
| That is why Tim Cook and Larry Fink are Xi Jinping's circus monkeys. | ||
| He will say jump. | ||
| They will say how high because it comes down to their bottom line. | ||
| It is the direct product of a bipartisan consensus in this country back in the 1990s. | ||
| Conviction in the faith of democratic capitalism. | ||
| The idea that somehow we could use capitalism as a vehicle to spread democracy to places like China. | ||
| The idea that we could export Big Macs and Happy Meals and somehow that was going to spread freedom. | ||
| Well, what they realized is they could turn that game on its head. | ||
| We thought we could use our money to get them to be more like us. | ||
| They realized they could use their money, access to their market, to get us to be more like them. | ||
| Or even one step better than that, that they could use our money to get us to be more like them. | ||
| Sending back those Disney movies and iPhones as Trojan horses to undermine the United States from within. | ||
| So that is the problem as I see it. | ||
| The concentration of state power and corporate power that lends itself to capture, facing down, a threat far more deep and dangerous than anything we've faced in our nation's history. | ||
| The Soviet Union did not supply the shoes on our feet or the phones in our pocket. | ||
| That is what makes our unique moment far more complicated than anything I think we faced in the latter half of the 20th century. | ||
| I want all the War Room audience, the cadre and the posse, everybody, to take this clip of this part of the interview plus that open and become a force multiplier. | ||
| Everybody has to see that. | ||
| I think it's the best succinct, and I say this from a guy who's been doing this for a couple of three years, I think it's the best, most succinct verbalization and thought about exactly where we stand. | ||
| And so Vivek Ramaswamy joins us now. | ||
| Vivek, I could take this in two ways, the CCP and the bigger geopolitical or the corporate. | ||
| And I think the way I want to do it is Governor Sununu of New Hampshire actually has gone on ABC and he's thinking of running for president. | ||
| And his big issue, because he's trying to put a shot across the governor of Florida's bow about his taking on Disney and he doesn't think it's right for politicians to be taking on a capitalist. | ||
| So he's all over the governor. | ||
| But he's really taking a shot at you. | ||
| He's saying, hey, you know, the Republican virtue is to let business be business and let the free market forces make changes here. | ||
| Why is that not just naive? | ||
| Why is that thinking dangerous? | ||
| He's really trying to attack DeSantis, but essentially he's attacking you because you're at a much deeper level of this about the real politics of global corporations, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, so I think that you can't recite slogans you memorized in 1980 trying to pretend like we're in 1980. | |
| It's like what Dorothy might have said in The Wizard of Oz, we're not in 1980 anymore. | ||
| And the reality is what we think of as the free market, that is no longer the free market today, Steve. | ||
| The free market cannot fix what it is not free to fix when it has been captured. | ||
| First of all, just domestically, it's this new merger of state power and corporate power that's far more powerful than either one alone. | ||
| I don't even call it, for example, in the realm of censorship, big tech censorship anymore. | ||
| Your listenership, stop calling it that. | ||
| It's not big tech censorship. | ||
| It is government tech censorship, right? | ||
| Where government is using companies through the back door to do what it couldn't do through the front door under the Constitution. | ||
| The same thing with respect to the economy, right? | ||
| Alaskan drilling, Arctic drilling, perfectly legal. | ||
| Why can no one lend to it? | ||
| Because John Kerry, the climate czar, went around to private companies getting them to sign a climate pledge that got the Green New Deal done through the back door. | ||
| They didn't need to pass it through Congress. | ||
| So it's this merger. | ||
| I mean, it's the classic Mussolini-esque definition of fascism, the merger of state power and corporate power to do what neither could on its own. | ||
| And then the American system is supposed to be based on distributed power anyway, right? | ||
| Distributed political power through the political process, distributed power through our old vision of capitalism. | ||
| Well, when that power gets so concentrated, the combination of state power and corporate power, that's what lends itself to capture, right? | ||
| And that's what the CCP recognized, is that if we can then use these companies as Trojan horses, getting them to sort of jump to our carrots and sticks, saying you can't enter the lucrative Chinese market Unless you kowtow to the CCP, you can't enter the lucrative Chinese market if you criticize the CCP, but will actually open the door wide open if you're critiquing the United States or applying constraints like emissions caps over there. | ||
| That effectively turns these companies into Trojan horses that advance the CCP's agenda from within. | ||
| That's not free market capitalism. | ||
| That is a hollowed out husk of free market capitalism. | ||
| And just because we recite the slogans and mantras does not make it true. | ||
| And there's nothing that irritates me more than conservatives who wish for a reality that was actually the one that we faced in 1980 when there's a Soviet Union that we could enter a Cold War with without making any real sacrifice because we didn't depend on them to power a modern way of life. | ||
| When in fact the reality today is the entire multinational corporation apparatus based even here in the United States is beholden to China because Xi Jinping's boot is on their neck. | ||
| That's not free market capitalism. | ||
| That is a form of corporatism that requires leadership and, I think, more precise state action. | ||
| It doesn't mean I'm agreeing with everything DeSantis has done down the line, but his heart's in the right place to be able to take on this marriage of corporate power and state power rather than just reciting something that Ronald Reagan told us to remember for 40 years. | ||
| We've got a couple of minutes here. | ||
| I'm going to hold you through the break. But here, because you make this very powerful thing, is that we thought the opening up of World Trade Organization and most favored nations would change them as liberal democratic capital. | ||
| It would be the end of history. It turned out when the Berlin Wall fell, Tiananmen Square happened shortly thereafter, and we had Bush send Scowcroft off and kind of made a devil's pact with the CCP. They could have collapsed right then. | ||
| How did it turn out that history didn't end? | ||
| How did history not end? | ||
| So give me a minute on that. We're going to go to break. | ||
| How did history not end? | ||
| How did the liberal order not actually went out? | ||
|
unidentified
|
China was actually playing the long game is the answer. | |
| They realized if you want to turn capitalism into a vehicle to spread your values, guess what? | ||
| We think in longer term time horizons than you do, we're going to use that same Trojan horse of capitalism to export our values back to you. | ||
| That's effectively what they did. | ||
| And it's not just the Chinese spy balloon that then becomes the Trojan horse. | ||
| It's an iPhone. It's a Disney movie. | ||
| It's TikTok, where each of these companies have to be able to advance an agenda, to be able to do business in China, have to be able to advance their agenda over here. | ||
| And so they turned that whole game on its head where we thought we were going to export those Big Macs and Happy Meals and spread democracy, as I said in that video. | ||
| Well, they realized they could do us up one better because capitalism can then be a two-way street for advancing their values instead. | ||
| And that's been the story of the last 10 years. | ||
| We're only now starting to wake up to it. | ||
| Okay, Vivek Ramaswamy is just not an analyst or a pundit. | ||
| He's actually a man of action. | ||
| He's got a solution for this. | ||
| We're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| We're going to return with Vivek. | ||
| He's going to talk to us about what then is to be done. | ||
| Also, Kelly Chewbacca from Alaska joins us. | ||
| Laura Loom has got a RICO suit that I don't think a lot of people know about. | ||
| Kelly Chewbacca's launched a new effort up in Alaska. | ||
| We're going to get to all of it. Short commercial break. | ||
| Back in the war room in just a moment Our room battleground with Stephen K Bannon you Okay, welcome back. | ||
| Vivek, given your analysis, your theory of the case, you're actually a man in the capital markets every day. | ||
| People want to know what then is to be done. | ||
| I want to know both on the investigation level, we had to kick off the weaponization today of the government, but both on the investigation level and the legislative level, but also if people want to put their capital to work. | ||
| What is your recommendation? | ||
|
unidentified
|
What has to be done? So I think what needs to be done in the policy level is we're gonna have to make some sacrifices. | |
| We got ourselves into this mess because we wanted to buy cheap stuff quickly. | ||
| Well, unfortunately, we got in bed with an enemy that's using that back against us as their economic military weapon against the US. So what does that mean? | ||
| I mean, I think that a lot of people aren't gonna like this, but I think it means that businesses should not, US companies should not be allowed to do business in China until the CCP reforms its behaviors. | ||
| Intellectual property theft, US user data theft, Their whole mercantilist agenda, that has to stop, and that's going to come at some short-term pain. | ||
| But unfortunately, that's the price we're going to have to pay in order for having committed three decades of this sin of actually getting in bed with an enemy and reliant on an enemy. | ||
| I just want to put a pin in that. | ||
| In other words, until the CCP falls, because you know we're the believers of not the legitimate government of the Lao Bajing, but... | ||
| You're now on the record of saying we should have 100 % decoupling until either they're removed or they have such a massive reform that they become like one of the liberal democracies of the West. | ||
| Is that essentially what you're saying? | ||
| Total decoupling? That is what I'm saying. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And I'm not saying it just with some sort of protectionist economic justification, Steve. | |
| I'm saying it with a national security justification because let's wake up to the actual national security threat. | ||
| It's not a military battle with China. | ||
| It is an economic war because in China, Economic policy and military policy are two sides of the same coin. | ||
| We suffer this illusion in this country that somehow the two are different as it relates to China. | ||
| They're not. And I think that that's going to involve some sacrifice. | ||
| I mean, other things that we need to do, I could go on and on, but I think accountability for the COVID-19 pandemic is a must, including even using financial levers to do it, including but not even limited to taking a look at the national debt held by China specifically and have some detailed ideas on this. | ||
| But my general view is that it will require some short term pain in order to do over the long run what we're going to be required to do as a country. | ||
|
unidentified
|
One of the easiest things we can do, and this relates to some of my work too, is abandon this global climate religion. | |
| That is shackling the U.S. economy while leaving China untouched. | ||
| I'll give you one example of this from my world, is the Blackrocks of the world that are forcing companies like Exxon and Chevron to drop oil production projects. | ||
| Guess what? Who's picking up those same projects in the Sichuan province of China? | ||
| Petro China's buying up a project that Chevron dropped. | ||
| Guess who's one of the largest shareholders of Petro China? | ||
| It's none other than, you guessed it, Blackrock, who gets a license to be the only foreign seller of mutual funds. | ||
| In China. So that's how this game is played. | ||
| So that's why I think they're using this as a vehicle to advance their geopolitical goals. | ||
| That's not capitalism. | ||
| That is mercantilism. | ||
| And as long as they're playing the mercantilist game, we can't just pretend, close our eyes, Sununu or whoever else wants us to do it, and pretend like this is true global free market capitalism. | ||
| We, at least as it relates to China, have to move to total decoupling. | ||
| As I say it, the Declaration of Independence of 2023 or the Declaration of Independence of 2024 is a declaration of independence from China. | ||
| It is a codependent relationship. | ||
| All codependent relationships do not end well. | ||
| The only question is who ends it first. | ||
| I think the sooner we end it, the better for us. | ||
| The longer we wait, the better for them. | ||
| So let's step up and act. | ||
| Even though it's gonna require some measure of short-term sacrifice to do it. | ||
| That's where I am on the record from a policy perspective of what we need to do. | ||
| And that gets to my deeper questions about if we revive our sense of American national identity and believe in who we really are, then guess what? | ||
| We actually have something to make those sacrifices for rather than just going through the motions. | ||
| That being said, in the meantime, I'm not in government, but I am in the private sector. | ||
| I think that there are opportunities And also ways to drive change through the private sector, which is what I'm trying to do by competing with these black rocks of the world by having started a firm, Strive, that on day one, what I said, we are not going to do business. | ||
| We're not going to build an asset management subsidiary in China. | ||
| Why? Is that because I dislike China? | ||
| Maybe as a citizen I do. | ||
| But as a businessman, that's not why. | ||
| It's because you can't be a good fiduciary for a U.S. client telling Chevron and Exxon how to behave on behalf of shareholders if you are doing it under the boot on your neck of Xi Jinping. | ||
| I will not be Xi Jinping's circus monkey. | ||
| And in theory, that should make firms like Strive better vocal fiduciaries for American clients because they don't have these mixed motives in China. | ||
| So I think private sector solutions can go so far, Steve. | ||
| But I'm not one of these people that just because I'm doing it, I'm going to tell you that that's the silver bullet. | ||
| It's not. Market solutions are, especially as it relates to China, only going to go so far. | ||
| I'm doing what I can. | ||
| But I think that, and that's why I founded Strive and I'm proud of it. | ||
| But that doesn't mean it's a panacea. | ||
| To the contrary, I think we're going to require not just some state governor one at a time doing some tokenist things so that they can get a trend on Twitter. | ||
| This is a national issue. | ||
| Needs to be dealt with by the next president of the United States because we all know the current one isn't going to do it. | ||
| To be able to say that we're declaring independence from China, not as a protectionist coddling. | ||
| Now, they didn't get into that whole economic argument. | ||
| This is the national security threat that we need to pay attention to. | ||
| Ukraine or anything else is a sideshow. | ||
| This is what we need to wake up to. | ||
| And the good news, though, is, Steve, We have a window to do it because Xi Jinping has been self-defeating in the last year. | ||
| He's opened up this window for us. | ||
| He was obsessed over getting his third term, as all autocrats are. | ||
| He's an egomaniac. | ||
| He did some things to his economy that leave them vulnerable now. | ||
| I think we have a short window to defeat China economically so that we will never have to militarily because they are vulnerable now if we can rise to the occasion and seize that window. | ||
| But that's going to require some sacrifice for us, but it's going to come at even greater pain for them. | ||
| That's what we're going to have to endure. | ||
| We don't need a Neville Chamberlain here in America. | ||
| We actually need somebody who's going to be willing to lead on the timescales of history rather than on the short-term timescales of electoral cycles. | ||
| Before I let you go, a couple of minutes, you talk about this, a brilliant analysis of really the greater war with the CCP, the existential threat to the American people, and to Lao-Beijing, the Chinese people, and our allies in Japan, India, South Korea, all of it. | ||
| But talk to me about this almost theology of climate change and how it manifests in ESG. At Strive, how do people fight that? | ||
| We have a lot of people talking about it now, but how do you actually, because it is a theology that permeates every aspect of these folks. | ||
| Walk us through that for a couple of minutes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It is a theology. | |
| It is absolutely a religion. | ||
| You have my generation and younger that's so hungry for a cause. | ||
| We don't believe in God or country anymore. | ||
| Well, you fill that vacuum with a new religion instead, and the hottest trending new one is climatism. | ||
| Now, that being said, I'm I'm trying to fight this through the private sector right now with Chevron trying to rescind a Scope 3 emissions proposal that they adopted in the year 2021 at the behest of folks like BlackRock State Student Vanguard using shareholder power to do it. | ||
| So you can read about that. That's what I'm doing at Strive. | ||
| Strive is a separate business effort on this front. | ||
| But let's just talk about the broader issue of the climate religion. | ||
| Here's the thing. Really wake up to this. | ||
| It has nothing to do with the climate. | ||
| Okay, if it did, the people who are calling for the U.S. to stop production here should be really concerned if PetroChina is picking up those projects because you know what? | ||
| Methane leakage, which even if you subscribe to this religion, It's 80 times worse for global warming than is even a unit of carbon dioxide. | ||
| They don't talk about that. They just talk about carbon emissions. | ||
| Methane leakage is worse in China than it is here. | ||
| So if you really cared about supposedly even the core tenet of your religion, your god, the climate, you would have cared about shifting that production to places like China because the projects are still proceeding, but they don't. | ||
| So that's clue number one. | ||
| Here's clue number two. | ||
| If you really cared that much about so-called carbon emissions, you would be a proponent of nuclear energy. | ||
| And yet this ESG movement, Vanguard's ESG funds, for example, exclude nuclear energy companies from their ESG funds. | ||
| The ESG movement is hostile to nuclear energy. | ||
| What's going on there? | ||
| That's the second clue, okay? | ||
| The problem with nuclear energy for this movement is not that it is too bad, but that it might be too good at solving their own, in my opinion, mostly made-up problem. | ||
| And so what does that tell you? | ||
| The E in the ESG is really just a Trojan horse for the S, the social prong. | ||
| The environmental prong is really just a Trojan horse, a vehicle, a vector for the social prong, where what this is about is global equity. | ||
| It is about making the West, and America in particular, repay its sins of the past for having achieved greatness and its exceptionalist status and its success. | ||
| Because what is this about? | ||
| They would have loved nuclear energy, but the problem with nuclear energy is that might just allow nations like America to continue to power themselves independently into the future. | ||
| No, no, no, that's not what this agenda is about. | ||
| This agenda is about shackling the West, shackling America in particular, So that the rest of the world can so-called catch up. | ||
| And you know who's using that to advance their objective? | ||
| You guessed it, none other than the CCP, who's laughing at us and the Baitzwo, in their language, the useful idiot left. | ||
| In the United States to laugh their way to the top because in these so-called climate negotiations, they still, this is staggering, they still claim developing nation status. | ||
| This is a foreign power that has a bigger navy than we do that flying spy balloons over sovereign US territory without real punity for it to pay an economy that we're dependent on. | ||
| And yet in the climate negotiations with John Kerry or somebody else, they claim developing nation status. | ||
| This is laughable, and that's because that's what the whole agenda was about. | ||
| Climate change and the climate change movement has nothing to do with the climate. | ||
| It has everything to do with global equity, and that is the religious fixation that could be the downfall of this country unless we wake up to that and fill our hunger for religion, our hunger for a belief in a higher power with something that is more meaningful like, say, American identity itself, which is what I spend my My waking hours trying to get this country to wake up to. | ||
| Vivek, how do people get to your social media? | ||
| How do they get to Strive? How do they find out more about you? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Strive.com is Strive, at Vivek G. Ramaswamy. | |
| That's me on Twitter. It's just spelled the usual way, you know, that usual, at Vivek G. Ramaswamy. | ||
| I have a website with my books, vivekramaswamy.com. | ||
| We'll probably be updating that soon to include more useful information. | ||
| I haven't been very good at self-promotion lately. | ||
| I usually just care about ideas, but I think it's important to get these ideas out there now to reach more people. | ||
| So this is just the beginning, Steve. | ||
| We will help. We're just getting started. | ||
| We're just getting started. Yes, sir. | ||
| No, it's incredible. | ||
| Your speech, we're going to push this out hard. | ||
| So trust me, we'll take care of the marketing part. | ||
| You just keep giving the ideas. | ||
| Vivek Ramaswamy, incredible. | ||
| Incredible. Thank you, sir. | ||
| Couldn't be better tee up to Kelly Chewbacca. | ||
| Kelly Chewbacca, these were her issues. | ||
| She should be in the United States Senate. | ||
| She ain't. And we got to ask her why and what are you doing about her, ma'am? | ||
| You're starting a new group. Ranked choice voting. | ||
| Everything Vivek just told us was really the platform you ran on. | ||
| You should be in the United States Senate. | ||
| We need your voice more than ever. | ||
| It's not because of you won, but you lost. | ||
| You won, but they took the Senate seat from you in rank choice voting. | ||
| Walk us through it and talk about your new group to try to fight this cancer throughout the nation. | ||
| It's great to be with you, Steve. | ||
| Thanks so much. We've started a group called Preserve Democracy. | ||
| We're taking words from the moderate and the left back for our purposes. | ||
| And it's to really work on election integrity. | ||
| That was one of the things that we were running on as well. | ||
| We know that ranked choice voting is a threat to our system, a threat to election integrity, and it is spreading quickly through the United States. | ||
| If we don't act now, the entire U.S. election system is about to change. | ||
| And that's the reality. | ||
| Ranked choice voting is here in Alaska, and it is spreading already. | ||
| It's in 28 states across the United States, and 14 other states currently are looking at implementing it or expanding it. | ||
| Even U.S. Congress has looked at twice now Making it mandatory in all 50 states. | ||
| And so we are currently on the brink of having the entire U.S. election system change to what we saw up here in Alaska this last election cycle. | ||
| And so how does this system work? | ||
| What happens is it comes with a blanket primary. | ||
| Parties no longer get to control who their candidates are. | ||
| By the way, this is in direct violation of a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case that said parties do get to control their candidates. | ||
| Instead, anybody can run for office and call themselves whatever they want, and everybody gets to vote on those candidates. | ||
| Democrats get to choose Republican candidates. | ||
| Republicans get to choose Democrat candidates. | ||
| You get the idea. Murkowski gets to call herself a Republican, even though she was censured and removed from the Republican Party in Alaska. | ||
| The candidates who get the most votes, regardless of party, get to go to the top four or top three, depending on the system, general election. | ||
| And then voters get to rank their candidates in order of preference. | ||
| Or they can choose to not rank. | ||
| The lowest candidates then drop off until there's top two candidates. | ||
| And the votes of the lower candidates, if you voted, for example, a candidate who dropped off, your votes that you ranked lower, they get redistributed to the upper candidates. | ||
| Are you confused yet? If you didn't rank somebody, then your vote just gets eliminated. | ||
| And then the votes get redistributed and shuffled according to an algorithm that people don't have insight into. | ||
| And then all of a sudden, a new winner is declared. | ||
| That's ranked choice voting. | ||
| And this is what's sweeping across the United States. | ||
| It's dangerous for several reasons. | ||
| Number one, it leads to voter suppression. | ||
| Here in Alaska, we saw the lowest voter turnout in the history of the state this past year, Steve. | ||
| We also see that the ACLU has testified that it leads to voter suppression. | ||
| In New York, the head of the NAACP is stating that this leads to voter suppression. | ||
| I think that that's extremely dangerous and a concern to every American. | ||
| On top of that, in Alaska, the head of our Division of Elections has testified ranked choice voting cannot be audited and the results cannot be recounted. | ||
| And so we have huge distrust in ranked choice voting. | ||
| Same thing in San Francisco. | ||
| This past election cycle, after the election was certified, There was a rank choice tallying error in the algorithm. | ||
| The wrong person was certified as the winner. | ||
| Same thing in New York. | ||
| Rank choice voting was calculated wrong and it led to the wrong results. | ||
| And so we're seeing that we've got problems with this rank choice algorithm that no human has insight into. | ||
| On top of that, when Maine used their rank choice system in 2020, they said it is calculated and actually verified, proven, the most expensive and the most negative election that they've ever had. | ||
| Ranked choice is voter suppression. | ||
| It's voter integrity issues or election integrity issues. | ||
| It can't be audited. It can't be recounted. | ||
| It's the most expensive and the most negative, and yet it's sweeping across the nation's seat. | ||
| And I'm telling people, it is sweeping. | ||
| It's in Arizona. It's everywhere I go in the country. | ||
| Kelly, we've got to bounce, but I need you to give. | ||
| How do people get to you on social media? | ||
| How do they get to your website? Everybody wants to find out about this. | ||
| It is sweeping the country, and it's going to be everywhere unless we stop it, and this is going to be a fight. | ||
| Where do they go, Kelly? War Room, we need your help donating to this. | ||
| PreserveDemocracy.com. | ||
| PreserveDemocracy.com because I need your help fighting rank choice and increasing voter turnout. | ||
| PreserveDemocracy.com, please. | ||
| We can stop this movement, but we need to move now. | ||
| PreserveDemocracy.com. Thanks, Steve. | ||
| Your Senate seat, I want all the Grace and Captain Bennett to get up in the chat rooms. | ||
| Your Senate seat was stolen from you because of this, and we're going to get on top of this fighting it. | ||
| Kelly Chewbacca, honored to have you on here, ma'am. | ||
| Thank you. Thanks, Steve. | ||
| Preserve Democracy. I want everybody to get on top of that. | ||
| I'll spread it out. Okay, Laura Loomer, you know her as a firebrand and an incredible spot maker, filmmaker, but people don't know. | ||
| Laura, thank you for joining us. | ||
| I've got about four minutes. I'm going to turn it over to you. | ||
| People don't understand that you've got, with all this explosion testimony yesterday, we had Anna Paulina Luna on this morning. | ||
| You've actually got a very important, quite frankly, could be groundbreaking, RICO suit against CNN. Walk us through what exactly you're doing against big tech and big media in suppression of you as a congressional candidate. | ||
| Well, thank you so much for having me on, Steve. | ||
| Yeah, it's actually a RICO lawsuit against Twitter, Facebook, Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, P&G, that's Procter& Gamble, and then elements within the FBI and federal agencies within our government. | ||
| The way that CNN has now recently gotten involved in this is because This lawsuit is progressing. | ||
| I filed this lawsuit in May of 2022 prior to Elon Musk purchasing Twitter. | ||
| And my legal counsel and I, John Pierce, who has represented people like Kyle Rittenhouse, Carter Page, and George Papadopoulos, he received notice from Twitter Notifying that they've just retained the general counsel and the woman who they've retained who works for a company called a firm called Wilkie and Farr used to actually do PR for CNN. And so clearly this RICO case I filed this case in May of 2022, | ||
| and it alleges the conspiracy that we now know exists, thanks to this Twitter hearing yesterday, that shows that companies like Facebook and Twitter and the tech executives have been colluding in a coordinated conspiracy with the FBI and other individuals to interfere illegally in our elections. | ||
| I know that Congresswoman Anna Paulina from Florida had retweeted my lawsuit and last night on Tim Pool's show she even mentioned how her testimony yesterday where she provided evidence of this cloud software system that these companies and the FBI are utilizing to illegally coordinate together and how that directly relates to my lawsuit. | ||
| Laura, I asked on the show a reason we want to have you on for evening. | ||
| We're going to have you back, but I want everybody to go to your site with you and your lawyer about how they assist here. | ||
| I asked her point blank. | ||
| I said, in that back and forth, do you believe that the executives perjured themselves? | ||
| And she says, there's no doubt in my mind, and we're going to go and prove that. | ||
| And that only gives more substance. | ||
| That only gives more substance to your charges. | ||
| Go ahead, ma'am. No, absolutely they perjured themselves. | ||
| And now that I finally have my Twitter account back, right, after being banned for five years, I was live tweeting the hearing yesterday. | ||
| They perjured themselves multiple times. | ||
| When Yael said who gave the order to censor the Hunter Biden story, okay, he said that it was Del Harvey. | ||
| And then when Vijaya was asked, right, she had said that it was her. | ||
| So what is it? It can't be both, right? | ||
| It's one or the other. | ||
| Somebody's lying. They've also been lying about their material aid and support for Islamic terrorist organizations, which is another claim in my RICO case. | ||
| And we saw they admitted yesterday under oath that they've been providing access to the Taliban. | ||
| We've got to bounce, but I want everybody to get to the site. | ||
| How do they find out more about your case, more about you, your Twitter, all of it? | ||
| Give it to us. Yeah, they can go to Loomerd.com, Loomerd.com, and that's where you can donate to my legal defense, read about the Rego case, and follow me on Twitter at Laura Loomerd. | ||
| Laura, a lot of people laughed about this case for a long time. | ||
| They ain't laughing now, and they're particularly not laughing in Silicon Valley and in CNN. Laura Luma, a fire breather, thank you so much for coming on. | ||
| We're going to follow this one closely. | ||
| I want everybody to go to that site right now. | ||
| Also, sign up, follow her on Twitter. | ||
| Thank you very much for coming on. | ||
| 10 o'clock tomorrow morning, 10 a.m., we're going to be back at it. |
Export Selection