March 7, 2023 - Bannon's War Room
48:50
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is the primal scream of a dying regime. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Pray for our enemies, because we're going medieval on these people. | |
| I got a free shot at all these networks lying about the people. | ||
| The people have had a belly full of it. | ||
| I know you don't like hearing that. | ||
| I know you try to do everything in the world to stop that, but you're not going to stop it. | ||
| It's going to happen. | ||
| And where do people like that go to share the big line? | ||
| MAGA Media. I wish in my soul, I wish that any of these people had a conscience. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Ask yourself, what is my task and what is my purpose? | |
| If that answer is to save my country, this country will be saved. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room. Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | |
| And the guy who got a pardon from Trump, who ran his 2016 campaign, and they've been on and off too, but Steve Bannon, also in a sign that this seems to be somewhat orchestrated, went publicly after Murdoch to back Trump. | ||
| So... | ||
| Okay, Murdoch, here's the way it's gonna be, brother. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You've disrespected Donald J. Trump long enough. | |
| He hasn't been on Fox News since he announced for presidency. | ||
| Remember... Murdoch, you've deemed Trump's not going to be president. | ||
| Well, we've deemed that you're not going to have a network because we're going to fight you every step of the way. | ||
| The Murdochs immediately have to start covering President Trump. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Pretty striking to see this all spill out there. | |
| I mean, you could have skipped some of CPAC, but those moments right there we wanted to show you because it's all out in the open. | ||
| On the one hand, it shows the stakes of this thing and that this really is a channel to the Republican primary base at a time where Fox is under pressure to change while it's being exposed for being even worse than people thought. | ||
| On the other hand, the question I'm about to take to my next guest is, How weak of a former presidential campaign are you, the former president running, when your top people are out here publicly begging for one interview on Fox News? | ||
| Josh Marshall joins me, founder and editor of Talking Points Memo and a shrewd analyst. | ||
| I put that question and all the above to you, sir. | ||
| You know, the one thing that occurs to me is, you know, we're all familiar with the HBO show Succession, which is a romantic laugh about the Burnock family and Fox News and so forth. | ||
| And so many of the things that you've been talking about over the last few minutes Each few of them is like an episode of Succession. | ||
| The Zoom call, the banning back and forth. | ||
| It's like these two old men. | ||
| I mean, Rupert Murdoch is, I think, over 90. | ||
| He's quite old. Just the back and forth. | ||
| One thing that comes out is this is what happens when you're a corrupt news organization. | ||
| One of the benefits of being a real news organization is that you keep basically on track by needing to cover the news. | ||
| Right. You're not in fights with the presidential candidate who you run or runs you or something like that or trying to get all this kind of stuff. | ||
| As you said earlier, there are... | ||
| Lots of problems with, you know, the big corporate news organizations. | ||
| But this is something that generally keeps them on track is that you always know that you are supposed to report at least what you think is the truth at the moment, right? | ||
| And that can change. You can be wrong. | ||
| No one's perfect. But that's the big thing that jumps out to me. | ||
| One thing I want to mention, you know, this has been As you mentioned, Murdoch has been back and forth on Trump for a while. | ||
| They started off at the very beginning, back in 2015, treating him as a joke. | ||
| He kind of went to war with Fox. | ||
| Fox did with him. | ||
| But as soon as Trump was the guy, they got on board. | ||
| And I don't think there's any question that is what is going to happen again. | ||
| And, you know, another part of this you have... | ||
| Let me build on your point and then you finish. | ||
| That's why we're seeing this so early, because they know they either stop Trump in this primary early, or a former president who's also Donald Trump becomes a nominee, and then they're stuck with him in the general, and they're stuck with what everyone would gird to be a January 6th sequel with more Training. | ||
| And I'm not trying to be alarmist, but Rupert Murdoch is not dumb. | ||
| And he understands exactly what they're up against. | ||
| So we're flushing out earlier a fight that might have normally come later. | ||
| So that builds on, I think, the point you were making. | ||
| I'll let you continue. Well, and to that point, they know that if he's the guy, if he's the nominee, they will have to not only support him, but lie on his behalf, right? | ||
| This is, again, an issue you don't have to grapple with if you're not a corrupt nominee. | ||
| What I was going to mention before is, you know, just after, well, a while after January 6th, when Fox was sort of going back and forth, are we going to call Arizona for him? | ||
| Are we going to support the big lie or not? | ||
| For a while, he was sort of shadow banning them. | ||
| You know, there's OANN, there's a half a dozen of them now, Newsmax, there's all these other kind of Fox clones. | ||
| And for a while he was like, hey, I'm going to get behind one of these and I'm going to take you guys out because you haven't been sufficiently loyal. | ||
| And so this battle that is based on the corruption of both of them It's really quite a melodrama. | ||
| It really, you know, it's better than succession in a way. | ||
| And in some ways it's funnier if it weren't real. | ||
| Yeah, I was going to say, I'd say better and so much worse. | ||
| But I know what you mean. | ||
| Thanks. As the 2024 Republican primary chugs along, i.e. | ||
| the Hunger Games, no one seems to be willing to properly take on the field's biggest challenge, Donald Trump. | ||
| Nikki Haley didn't even mention him by name at CPAC, but she was still heckled by attendees chanting Trump after leaving the stage. | ||
| Ron DeSantis didn't even go to CPAC, choosing to give a speech at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on the other side of the country. | ||
| And Trump is still dominating in the polls. | ||
| A recent YouGov online poll has Trump at 45 percent, DeSantis at 29 percent, Haley is a distant third at 4 percent. | ||
| Fernando Amandi is a veteran democratic strategist and pollster based in Miami. | ||
| Carlos Corbello is a former Republican congressman of Florida. | ||
| They both join me now. | ||
| Fernando, I will start with you. | ||
| I am not a believer in Ron DeSantis. | ||
| I don't think that he has much of a chance. | ||
| I think that he is a media creation. | ||
| I think that basically Donald Trump is going to clown him to no end. | ||
| And I think that what he has done in Florida is not going to be particularly popular when he tries to sell it to the rest of the country. | ||
| But what say you as a pollster to the fact that he's the only person in the Republican field right now that's within 20 points of Donald Trump and the unofficial straw poll at CPAC? Okay. | ||
| Well, I think, Jason, it speaks to the fact that... | ||
| It's Tuesday, 7 March, in the year of our Lord, 2023. | ||
| We're going to get... | ||
| My teams need to cut the part where Johnson gets to cut to the chase about the conundrum That all of the Keebler elves and Ron DeSantis are in, which is quite a conundrum. | ||
| There you see the fight that matters right now. | ||
| I'm going to give you signal, not noise, is to break the axis of the Wall Street oligarchs, the Paul Singers, the Steve Schwartzmans, the Ken Griffins, the Tudor Joneses, all these massive The guys can write you a $50 million check or a $100 million check, and it doesn't change their lifestyle. | ||
| I'm talking about the biggest of the big, the murderer's row of the Wall Street oligarchs that are in business with Mitch McConnell and the collaborationist Senate. | ||
| And this is why, by the way, I tell you what you're in business with. | ||
| Their darling, their go-to girl is Sinema. | ||
| Because she stopped the carried interest tax, which we have to have. | ||
| And the carried interest tax is just smart because that's just an income. | ||
| We need to get to the, for the oligarchs, the repatriation of the assets that the Federal Reserve has basically given to them. | ||
| We'll get to more of that later and deconstruct it. | ||
| But that, so you've got the oligarchs, you've got the Mitch McConnell set, of this collaboration is senators that gave Biden all the wins plus that donors and most importantly the linchpin is Murdoch who has essentially said I mean it's in the deposition they said we're going to turn Trump into a non-person that's a quote we are going to turn Trump into a non-person okay and we have to break that and we know that the speech at CPAC and by the way thank President Trump just put some very kind words about that it's up on my getter on his truth social about the speech and I think I'll link to it Right there, | ||
| and Jason Johnson, who's a very smart guy, he's a professor that sits in, he's a contributor to, by the way, hates War Room, hates me, hates all of it, doesn't mean he doesn't, he's not quite perceptive. | ||
| He lays out the case about the conundrum of the Hebrew elves and DeSantis in this primary. | ||
| Remember, the Iron Triangle of Murdoch and McConnell and Ken Griffin, Is that they will use any weapon at hand, any instrument at hand before them, whether it's Glenn Youngkin or Ron DeSantis or Nikki Haley, they will use any of the weapons before them to hopefully, they think, take a long shot and beat Trump in a primary, but if not doing that to damage him and then to support a Newsom or a Biden or whoever in the general. | ||
| Murdoch and Fox in 2016, let me be blunt. | ||
| They tried to kneecap Trump with Megyn Kelly at the first debate. | ||
| We backed them off with the great Matt Boyle and Tony Lee. | ||
| We backed them off. They were never that far in our camp, trust me, even when the numbers closed. | ||
| Murdoch was never. They were always jiggy about that. | ||
| And after Billy Bush, they completely flipped. | ||
| And the weekend before, they told us. | ||
| They told me to my face. | ||
| They'd already done the polling. | ||
| Mordeca made a decision. There was going to be Hillary Clinton. | ||
| There's going to be foreign electoral votes. | ||
| This is going to be a landslide. | ||
| We were down by five or six. | ||
| It was over. Okay? | ||
| And that's why Paul Ryan, that's one of the reasons Paul Ryan didn't come. | ||
| He wasn't there on that Sunday beforehand. | ||
| He called us up and he says, hey, you're going to lose Wisconsin. | ||
| You're going to lose again. I can't be associated. | ||
| I already lost with Romney. I can't be associated with another national campaign loser. | ||
| And they backed out. They never had Trump's back. | ||
| Ever. Murdoch tweeted out in the summer of 15, I think it was July, quote, Trump, stop. | ||
| You're embarrassing yourself and the country. | ||
| Murdoch always said, only after we won and he was rubbing up on Jared. | ||
| Those two rubbed up on each other that there was any kind of rapprochement. | ||
| And then as soon as 3 November, they called it early. | ||
| Boom! They were out on Trump. | ||
| You can read the depositions. They never once said, let's have an investigative reporter. | ||
| Let's look at this math. Have we done our own analysis? | ||
| Have we drilled down? | ||
| And looked at this independently, brought in a new team to look at like a team B to look with new eyes. | ||
| No, no, no effort whatsoever. | ||
| And then they said, we're going to make this. | ||
| We're going to make Trump a non-person. | ||
| Well, guess what? We're making you a non-person. | ||
| We're not going to have a bunch of foreigners and a bunch of foreigners, you know, intrude into America. | ||
| You've also you already done enough damage. | ||
| With Iraq and Afghanistan, your cheerleading for the Iraq war was outrageous. | ||
| You're selling the lie. | ||
| And you talk about the election stealing, you know, oh, we can't push that, you know, we can't, you know, Trump's terrible, all these people are awful, we're not going to have them back on, terrible, they're just terrible. | ||
| Think about it, you never went and never did anything on the weapons of mass destruction lie that Cheney sold the nation. | ||
| It was outrageous. They're neoliberal neocons. | ||
| You have to understand that there's a construct of the way the world operates. | ||
| It's capital markets and it's national security. | ||
| That's what's converging and conflating this crisis, this collapse. | ||
| The Murdochs, they're at the center of that. | ||
| Their global media empire is at the center of that, of the neoliberal, neocon world order. | ||
| And that is what is collapsing before you. | ||
| You're the only ones that can keep it going because they need your taxes, they need your pension funds, they need the insurance companies that have your money. | ||
| And most importantly, you need your sons and daughters to go die on foreign battlefields on wars that are forgotten afterwards and have no victory. | ||
| That's the tragedy for, you know, when Mo was over in Iraq, you sit there every day, you have no control. | ||
| It's all in God's hands. We're sitting there. | ||
| What is this all for? | ||
| What am I doing? Is this for the Iraqis to have democracy so that a couple of years later they can sit there and go, you know what? | ||
| We're going to sell the oil to the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| We're going to have a huge output deal, and guess what? | ||
| We're going to convert it. We're going to only take it in a Chinese yuan. | ||
| You're not going to convert into dollars to break the petrodollar. | ||
| That's the reality of the world. | ||
| Now, we're going to take a break. | ||
| We're going to get up. Great Tucker did an amazing job last night. | ||
| BD's going to be here, but... | ||
| You know, and hey, I got to tell it like it is. | ||
| You know, Hannity last night gives another softball, hoochie-coochie, you know, T-ball interview to Ron DeSantis and then plays Trump's, you know, radio interview after that as like a big deal trying to accommodate. | ||
| That's not accommodating. This is not about Hannity or any individual personality. | ||
| This is about the Murdochs and their ownership and this is about the Murdochs and what they – because they command it. | ||
| They write the paychecks. They command what happens. | ||
| This is about the Murdochs trying to make Trump a non-person and going to work for the Democrats after they don't take him out in the primary. | ||
| This is the signal, not the noise. | ||
| This is the thing that matters right now. | ||
| Keep the main thing the main thing. | ||
| Okay, short commercial break. | ||
| From Revolver News, Darren B has been on this. | ||
| Last night, J6, the lies and misrepresentations. | ||
| Tucker Carlson laid it all out. | ||
|
unidentified
|
There seems to be a fundamental bind that Republicans running in 2024 are going to face. | |
| They have to say one way or another how they stand on the legitimacy of the 2020 election. | ||
| If you come forward and say the 2020 election is legitimate and Joe Biden got elected, you automatically lose the MAGA crowd. | ||
| If you come forward and say the 2020 election was not legitimate, then you're acknowledging that Donald Trump should have been president. | ||
| So how do you justify running against the guy? | ||
| How are Republicans, how is Nikki Haley, DeSantis or anybody else, how are they going to run and answer that question? | ||
| Well, Jason, I think the issue is the point you brought up at the beginning of the segment. | ||
| Let me have it. Okay. | ||
| That's Professor Jason Johnson. | ||
| He's a contributor at MSNBC. Very brilliant guy. | ||
| I think he's a professor at Morgan State. | ||
| He just nailed. | ||
| He's just nailed in 60 seconds the conundrum of the Kibler Elves and Ron DeSantis in the Republican primary right there. | ||
| I'm going to play that a gazillion times. | ||
| I want to bring in Darren Beattie. | ||
| We've got a lot to go through. We've got some Tucker stuff. | ||
| But Darren, I want to ask you first about this Murdoch situation. | ||
| We've got to get this sorted right now because you have the Iron Triangle of the big oligarchs on Wall Street, the Mitch McConnell donor, who are most of the oligarchs, but these collaborationist senators, plus the Murdoch apparatus with the Murdochs. | ||
| And I'm not picking on any individual people at Fox. | ||
| Because Murdoch runs this with an iron fist. | ||
| Darren Beattie. Look, I think it's important to understand the significance of honest signals in politics. | ||
| That means when it's down to the wire, when it really matters, who has who's back. | ||
| And you brought it up. 2016, people forget so easily. | ||
| 2016, Fox, along with the entire institutional apparatus of the GOP was vigorously opposed to Trump and did everything it could to stop him. | ||
| It was only after, against all odds, against the coordinated opposition of every powerful institution in the country, if not the world, that Trump won, that all of these people who did everything they could to stop him ingratiated themselves and to some degree this worked and people forgot what their true colors really were when it mattered. | ||
| And you're seeing this just come to the fore. | ||
| Yet once again, people like Paul Ryan, people like Mitch McConnell, people like the Murdochs, the whole institutional apparatus at Fox, of course they're opposed to Trump. | ||
| They've always been opposed to Trump. | ||
| It's just now In their estimation, they don't have to kiss up to him. | ||
| They would rather put him down for good politically, and they think they can do that by weaponizing people like, you know, potentially DeSantis against him and putting out a blackout on Trump's media appearance in Fox. | ||
| And that's another big difference is Trump benefited tremendously, as you know, from earned media in 2016. | ||
| There is a coordinated consensus across the board They will not make that mistake again. | ||
| The media will do everything it can to black out Trump, give him a blacklist from the media, which frankly is all the more reason that I think he needs to get back on Twitter. | ||
| It's the one thing, you know, one of the few things he has going for him in terms of media distribution is he has his powerful Twitter account reinstated and the rest of the media is blacking him out as much as they can on behalf of these special interests. | ||
| He needs to get the word out because when he does, the public's reminded why he's the only guy for the job. | ||
| And he reminded us of that very powerfully in his tremendous CPAC speech. | ||
| I took an hour yesterday, and I played my speech, but I also went through just the policy points. | ||
| I think I only got through six. | ||
| I mean, that thing, and I tell the team over there, I think we've got to highlight those. | ||
| There's ten major The policy announcement of that speech that nobody else could do. | ||
| Remember, it's not just Trump. | ||
| It's Trumpism. | ||
| It's populist nationalists. | ||
| They want that to stop. These are neoliberal neocons. | ||
| They are the Washington generals. | ||
| To the Democrats' Harlem Globetrotters in this, this is why it's taken us 40 years to get here because it's always about unity and compromise. | ||
| And you can see that Biden would have no accomplishments if it was not for the collaboration of the Senate. | ||
| And now you get Mitch McConnell saying his number one priority is Ukraine and making sure that Biden gets all these spending deals done. | ||
| And you're going to see this on the debt ceiling. | ||
| Everything that the populist nationalist movement is adamantly opposed to, Therefore, remember, Conservative Inc., you see him rolling in now on DeSantis and rubbing up on him. | ||
| And look, Mark Halperin's got a piece up on Newsmax, and we're going to hopefully maybe get Mark on here in the next couple of days, who's still a very brilliant political analyst. | ||
| He deconstructs the Reagan Library speech, and I'll be brutally frank. | ||
| It was a nothing burger. | ||
| When Governor DeSantis is out there and you've got the Chinese dropping the sound of war toxins, you're in 1939 heading towards the Third World War. | ||
| You want to be president of the United States versus you're running against a guy who gave us four years of peace and prosperity, and you're at the Reagan Library? | ||
| You've got to stand and deliver. | ||
| You've got to talk about the collapse of the neoliberal neocon order. | ||
| I know it's uncomfortable because you still are a neoliberal neocon, and I hate to be so brutally frank, but you can tell that on these wishy-washy answers on Ukraine. | ||
| When you're sitting there, you can't play small ball. | ||
| You can't play... Yeah, Gavin Newsom in Florida, in the California model versus the Florida model, I got that. | ||
| That's important. I can see that. | ||
| But at the Reagan Library, historic place. | ||
| And first off, it was a lackluster speech. | ||
| Compare the policy prescriptions in that. | ||
| Look, I get the woke stuff and all that. | ||
| We're one of the biggest supporters. We have all the parents' rights movements on here. | ||
| I understand it's important to go against the corporations. | ||
| And I think Governor Santa has been a terrific governor. | ||
| But you ain't running for governor of America. | ||
| You're running to be commander in chief in a time of war. | ||
| You got to step it up. And you're a warrior. | ||
| You've been in those places. | ||
| Look, and I keep saying, I don't want this inner squad. | ||
| I don't want the Murdochs to have an inner squad conflict here. | ||
| I think Ron DeSantis would be a great secretary of defense for President Trump. | ||
| And I think that would position Ron DeSantis to be one of the leading candidates in 2028, which is the rightful time we need him. | ||
| We are in the early days of the kinetic part of the Third World War, and we don't have time for on-the-job training, and how would you not—and this is what ticks me off so much about the Murdochs—why would you not have a guy on here that you haven't had on live until we forced you at CPAC because you weren't going to do that? | ||
| Why would you have—and Tannity playing this interview, that's so cheeseball. | ||
| You do an interview on the radio show and you play it up at some big exclusive on Fox, that's not good enough, okay? | ||
| That's not good enough. Not good enough. | ||
| Why would they not respect the audience to have a guy's opinion? | ||
| Let's hear what he has to say. | ||
| He gave us four years of peace and prosperity against these same barbarians. | ||
| Wouldn't you like to hear what he would want to do with the Ayatollahs and the nuclear weapon? | ||
| Wouldn't you want to hear what he'd do with Erdogan? | ||
| Wouldn't you want to hear what he'd do with the KGB-CCP merger? | ||
| The last 24 hours, ladies and gentlemen, look at the Drudge Mac Daddy. | ||
| I've been posting them up on Getter. | ||
| Drudge has got it. I mean, the CCP is throwing down hard. | ||
| They're selling the war toxins. | ||
| They say, hey, we see the containment strategy Trump set up. | ||
| You guys keep on. | ||
| You're going to have a problem. Okay? | ||
| They're in your face. Darren Beattie. | ||
| A couple points, Steve. | ||
| A couple points. So you mentioned this is about Trumpism. | ||
| This is about the movement. | ||
| It's not about Trump himself. | ||
| I'll offer an addendum to that. | ||
| I think fundamentally that's true, but there's a crucial addendum, and that is this, that the moniker of Trumpism after Trump, Trumpism without Trump, is the false song, to use a phrase, that the establishment is using to neutralize and destroy both Trumpism and Trump. | ||
| The false song of Trumpism after Trump is what the establishment is using to destroy both Trumpism as Trump. | ||
| Because right now, Trump is the leader of this movement. | ||
| Trump is the once-in-a-generation charismatic figure who has a real- Give me that again. | ||
| Give me that again. Go slowly for me. | ||
| Because, hey, everybody knows Beattie's my guy. | ||
| He's one of the most brilliant theoreticians we got in this entire movement. | ||
| He was a genius in the White House. | ||
| He's the only guy who had enough balls of a tenured professor or a guy at a major Ivy League or Ivy League equivalent to support Trump. | ||
| And then they came after him because he's so smart. | ||
| Hit the rewind button and give me that whole thing again, the addendum. | ||
| Very simple. It's ultimately about the movement. | ||
| It's ultimately about Trumpism. | ||
| But this moniker that you hear of Trumpism without Trump. | ||
| We want Trumpism, but not Trump. | ||
| We want to move beyond Trump. | ||
| That is the false song with which the establishment is trying to kill both Trumpism and Trump. | ||
| The moniker of Trumpism without Trump is the establishment's way of destroying both Trump and Trumpism. | ||
| And that's very important to understand. | ||
| At the moment, you cannot separate the unique, charismatic talent of Trump, a generational talent that you don't see anywhere from the movement. | ||
| It's not enough. | ||
| Anybody can get in front of camera and read the script of talking points that are now revealed thanks to Trump's to be successful and resonant with the public. | ||
| Anyone can read a script and not anyone can govern competently, but competent governance is still a very different thing and a very far cry from being a once in a generation charismatic political figure who started and still leads the most important political movement in our nation's history. | ||
| I think people need to understand that crucial distinction. | ||
| That is why the establishment is doing everything it can to promote. | ||
| They're not never Trump anymore. | ||
| They understand that's not going to work. | ||
| It never worked. Now they are for Trumpism without Trump because they know that Trumpism without Trump right now means the end of both Trump and Trumpism. | ||
| Yes, because they're harsh. | ||
| It's a brilliant point. They don't really mean anti-traumaticism. | ||
| Okay, we're going to take a break. BD's going to be here and get into the Tucker revelations last night, which I thought... | ||
| Tucker did an extraordinary job, given the political sensitivity of it and the way you have to juggle a lot of balls. | ||
| I thought he did a really excellent job in providing the visuals with commentary. | ||
| And I know he did a good job because Morning Joe wasn't all over it. | ||
| If they thought they saw an opening here, they'd be all over it. | ||
| They didn't want to talk about it. It's like it didn't happen. | ||
| Beattie also says, reading a script, These guys gotta throw away the scripts. | ||
| Nikki Haley reading, Mike Pompeo reading, Ron DeSantis, throw it away. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's gotta come from the heart. It's authenticity. | |
| Authenticity. Throw away the scripts. | ||
| Okay, BD next from Ruval. | ||
| Takeaway from the corpus of footage that we spent three weeks looking at, it's that the January 6th committee lied. | ||
| Its members are liars. | ||
| And as the result of those lies, course of liberties in this country were eroded. | ||
| People went to prison. | ||
| They're in prison as of right now unjustly. | ||
| So those lies had consequences. | ||
| So you have to ask yourself, whatever happened to the members of the January 6th committee? | ||
| These liars who hurt people and the country? | ||
| Well, let's see. Adam Schiff is running for Senate. | ||
| Adam Kinzinger got a job at CNN. Liz Cheney somehow wound up a professor at the University of Virginia, the Augusta University of Virginia. | ||
| They're all still there. | ||
| Benny Thompson. Ooh. | ||
| Listen to his wisdom. But they're liars. | ||
| And above all, this video proves it. | ||
| Here's another installment. | ||
| One of the enduring mysteries of January 6th is the role that intelligence and law enforcement agencies played in the events of that day. | ||
| We know there was some number of undercover federal agents in the crowd at the Capitol. | ||
| Officials have since admitted that under oath. | ||
| But what exactly were they doing there? | ||
| The January 6th committee worked hard to hide the answer to that question. | ||
| We do know from contemporaneous videotape that a mysterious figure called Ray Epps encouraged the crowd to go into the Capitol. | ||
| For some reason, Epps has never been indicted for that. | ||
| But there's no question, he didn't. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We need to go into the Capitol! | |
| Under public pressure, the January 6th committee finally interviewed Ray Epps. | ||
| Epps told the committee that he never entered the Capitol and therefore never committed a crime. | ||
| His text messages showed that at 2.12 p.m., he boasted to his nephew that he had, quote, orchestrated the protests at the Capitol. | ||
| He admitted he helped get people there. | ||
| Yet curiously, congressional Democrats consider Ray Epps an ally, not an insurrectionist. | ||
| Tonight we can tell you that at the very least, Ray Epps lied in his sworn testimony to the January 6th committee. | ||
| Epps testified that when he sent the text messages to his nephew, he had already left the Capitol grounds to return to his hotel room. | ||
| That is not true. | ||
| The surveillance footage we found shows that, in fact, Ray Epps remained at the Capitol for at least another half an hour. | ||
| You're seeing that on your screen now. | ||
| What was Epps doing there? | ||
| We can't say. But we do know that he lied to investigators. | ||
| The January 6th committee likely knew this, too. | ||
| Democrats had access to the same tape, yet they defended Ray Epps. | ||
| No honest investigation would do that. | ||
| But the point of the January 6th committee was never to investigate anything. | ||
| The point was to stage a made-for-TV show trial. | ||
| From the opening moments, the tone of the hearings was almost comically overheated and polemical. | ||
| There is not a tragedy in American history that Democrats didn't liken to the protests of January 6th. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm from a part of the country where people justify the actions of slavery, the Ku Klux Klan, and lynching. | |
| How staged and fraudulent was the work of the January 6th committee? | ||
| Democrats hired a Good Morning America producer called James Goldston to dramatize the footage they released. | ||
| They even dubbed in audio to make the pictures more sensational, as in a docudrama. | ||
| The networks carried it all live as if it were real. | ||
| They lied about the police officer they claimed to revere. | ||
| If they were willing to do that, then their dishonesty knew no limits. | ||
| And as you'll see in a moment, the dishonesty did know no limits. | ||
| New surveillance video and just admitted, including new reporting on Ray Epps and what he was doing there and what he told investigators he was doing there and how it's contradicted by the video evidence. | ||
| But first, to assess what we just saw, Charlie Hurt of The Washington Times joins us now. | ||
| Charlie, thanks so much. for coming up. | ||
| So if you think, and you've really got to feel for Brian Sicknick, who's passed away, and you've got to wonder about anyone who knew, they knew that he was not murdered by the mob, but they've claimed it anyway for two years. | ||
| And it takes a very low kind of person to do that, to lie about a man's death like that for political advantage, and this tape proves that's exactly what they did. | ||
|
unidentified
|
These people are truly sick. | |
| You think you know how sick they are, and then you see something like this and you realize that there is truly nothing, no body, no event, nothing that they won't exploit. | ||
| As Joe Biden said, this is also about white supremacy. | ||
| Nobody comported themselves worse than the press did on this day and, of course, in the years afterwards. | ||
| Okay, I want to bring in Darren Beattie of Revolver. | ||
| Darren, you've been all over the whole thing. | ||
| And you've been on Tucker many times. | ||
| I know you've worked with his team. | ||
| And I think they did a great job of threading the needle because they couldn't use the facial recognition. | ||
| Because as he said, he's not an investigative like DOJ. He's not FBI. He's not J6. But I think what people are most shocked about We didn't even get to the QAnon shaman, which is probably the most egregious. | ||
| How did the committee have... | ||
| I mean, this is clearly illegal what they've done. | ||
| It's outrageous. | ||
| You got the fedsurrection part with the Ray Epps. | ||
| You got the lies on Sicknick, which you were the one that really went back a revolver and painstakingly told us that this was all a lie. | ||
| You got the QAnon. | ||
| I mean, it was so outrageous. | ||
| It was so outrageous last night. | ||
| Tell me your thoughts. Well, yes, so much to cover. | ||
| I mean, the footage of Brian Sicknick walking around the Capitol just reminds us, before Revolver News even changed the entire narrative on January 6th with our Fed's erection thesis and reporting, we debunked repeated and severe and malicious lies pertaining to the circumstances surrounding Officer Sicknick's death. | ||
| As Tucker covered a bit in that segment, initially the story was he was bludgeoned to death with a fire extinguisher. | ||
| That was wrong. | ||
| Then they switched to a narrative where he was killed by bear spray. | ||
| We actually did a heat map image analysis, comparative image analysis, to show that... | ||
| Hold it, hold it, hold it, hold it, hold it, hold it. | ||
| Darren, Darren, Darren, Darren, please. | ||
| They're not wrong. | ||
| These were lies. | ||
| They had this footage. | ||
| That's my point. It's not people make mistakes in reporting all the time. | ||
| This was done on purpose. | ||
| They knew from the entire time they put that story out, and Tucker had everybody on there saying he's bludging to death. | ||
| Then they went to bear spray. | ||
| They knew it was a lie at the time, sir. | ||
| You agree? Yes. | ||
| Well, I mean, not everyone who repeated the lie, but the originators of this false narrative, I think, knew it was a lie. | ||
| I think that's pretty clear because the evidence was so apparent. | ||
| All you had to do is a little bit of digging to see that he was not bludgeoned to death. | ||
| He was not killed by bear spray and so forth. | ||
| But these initial lies Again, this was the prelude to the larger fedsurrection. | ||
| These initial lies were used to amplify the severity. | ||
| Our original and first piece on January 6th was actually about the lies surrounding Brian Sicknick's death. | ||
| The title of the piece was very carefully chosen with a full understanding of its severity and connotations. | ||
| We called it MAGA blood libel because that's exactly what it was, because the death of Sicknick was used to call it a deadly insurrection. | ||
| To reinforce the false narrative that this was a deadly domestic terror attack that put January 6th in the same conversation absurdly as September 11th or whatever. | ||
| Kamala Harris said it was like Pearl Harbor, all these ridiculous things, but they needed the adjective deadly To even have a chance of selling that with a straight face, and they got that by lying about the circumstances surrounding Sicknick's death. | ||
| The thing about Epps, you know, Tucker's absolutely right. | ||
| The January 6th committee, they were completely disingenuous with respect to Epps, and nowhere does that come out more clearly than in the transcript of their interrogation of Epps himself. | ||
| As I pointed out another appearance on this program, what's remarkable in this transcript is how Some of the committee members, to their credit, are actually asking intelligent questions. | ||
| Adam Kinzinger, however, he bends over backwards, which is weird because he's usually on all fours, but this time he's bending over backwards to offer the most implausibly charitable interpretation of inconsistency after inconsistency after lie on the part of Ray Epps. | ||
| Ray Epps is so... | ||
| detached from reality. | ||
| He has such contempt for the truth that he said initially, the reason I thought to go into the Capitol was I thought it would be legal. | ||
| I thought it would just be open and we can go in. | ||
| And they said, well, if you thought it would be legal, why did you preface your remarks by saying, I'm probably going to go to jail for this. | ||
| I'm probably going to get arrested for this. | ||
| He said, well, gee, I don't know. | ||
| They said, why do you think everybody immediately accused you of being a Fed because of your outlandish suggestions to go in the Capitol? | ||
| He said, I don't think that really happened. | ||
| My son doesn't remember that happening. | ||
| He even suggested that the footage, the now iconic footage of the crowd chanting Fed and pointing right at Ray Epps, he suggested that footage isn't real, that it was doctored, that it was somehow edited in after the fact. | ||
| The transcript of this interrogation of re-ups by the committee is really something to behold. | ||
| And there's one more thing to be said about the committee, in particular is Chairman Benny Thompson. | ||
| It's often overlooked that Benny Thompson was not only the chair of the January 6th committee, he was the Department of Homeland Security's stooge within Congress. | ||
| He was a seven-time chair of the Homeland Security Committee. | ||
| Why would the Department of Homeland Security of all institutions, of all bureaucracies, have this active interest in massaging the narrative of January 6th? | ||
| I think it's very interesting to consider in light of a couple of things. | ||
| One, the DHS is the tip of the spear when it comes to the repurposing of the national security apparatus domestically in order to silence, suppress, and destroy Trump and his movement. | ||
| And secondly, as we recently learned, the Department of Homeland Security is the only bureaucracy with an intelligence agency that has the imprimatur to operate domestically. | ||
| The CIA is an intelligence agency. | ||
| Technically speaking, they're only allowed to operate overseas. | ||
| Technically speaking, the FBI, while it does do some kind of work gathering information that you could call intelligence, is a law enforcement agency, and therefore it's subject to the restrictions that are attended to the law enforcement process. | ||
| The DHS is the only organization that has this domestic intelligence agency, which is very interesting to consider in light of a statement made by Ray Epps' lawyer. | ||
| Ray Epps' lawyer, who happens to be a nine-year veteran of the Phoenix FBI field office, by the way, Ray Epps' lawyer was doing this big tour that was picked up by the J6 committee and Adam Kinzinger and others, and the lawyer was saying, Ray Epps has nothing to do with the FBI. And Ray Epps, for that matter, had nothing to do with any law enforcement agency. | ||
| And you'll notice this lawyer was clinging on to the term law enforcement agency for dear life. | ||
| Why would that be? | ||
| Could it have something to do with the fact that The DHS is not a law enforcement agency. | ||
| Military intelligence is not a law enforcement agency. | ||
| And neither, for that matter, would any kind of private cutout organization contractor work that is doing the bidding of those agencies be a law enforcement agency. | ||
| And this is particularly interesting to consider in light of Epps' lawyer's answer to another question. | ||
| When asked, okay, you're saying he's not FBI, he's not law enforcement agency, can you tell us if he's involved with any government agency, period? | ||
| The lawyer's response was very telling. | ||
| If you read between the lines, his response was, not to my knowledge. | ||
| Now, clearly the lawyer in Epps had conversations about Ray Epps's and his potential involvement with government agencies. | ||
| How else would the lawyer be able to so emphatically and explicitly deny EPS's involvement with law enforcement agencies? | ||
| So it's clear that if the lawyer were in a position to deny involvement with any agency, just as explicitly and just as emphatically, he would have left at the opportunity to do so. | ||
| But instead, we have the absolute damning answer Not to my knowledge. | ||
| Give me a break. We all know it. | ||
| EPS is the smoking gun of January 6th. | ||
| And we have more proof now than that. | ||
| Darren, Darren, hang on for a second. | ||
| We're going to get back. We're going to deconstruct more of the Tucker revelations. | ||
| Also, Jim Hoff is going to join us about the ERIC system. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Next. Editor has arrived. | |
| The new social media taking on big tech, protecting free speech, And canceling cancel culture. | ||
| Join the marketplace of ideas. | ||
| The platform for independent thought has arrived. | ||
| Superior technology. | ||
| No more selling your personal data. | ||
| No more censorship. | ||
| No more cancel culture. | ||
| Enough. Getter has arrived. | ||
| It's time to say what you want, the way you want. | ||
| Download now. | ||
| By the way, get up on Getter. | ||
| We're doing all the live streams. | ||
| I'm going to do Royce White's show tonight. | ||
| We'll be up on Getter on that. | ||
| So make sure you download. | ||
| You get all this great content, all our contributors, the Revolver guys, everybody. | ||
| So it's totally free. | ||
| I'm an idiot. I can use it. | ||
| You're not an idiot. You'll be able to use it greatly. | ||
| MyPillow.com, promo code WARROOM, buy one, get one free. | ||
| You need to sleep at the sleep of the judge. | ||
| You're not going to get a lot of time to sleep. | ||
| In particular, I tell you the stories that are breaking this morning. | ||
| You're not going to get a lot of time to sleep. | ||
| So you need every minute of your sleep to count like 10. | ||
| Okay? Orders of magnitude better. | ||
| You get that on the products of MyPillow. | ||
| This is what we use in the War Room. | ||
| MyPillow.com, promo code WARROOM. MyPillow 2.0, this thing will change your sleep habits. | ||
| Everybody's raving about it. Buy one, get one free. | ||
| But also when you go to MyPillow.com, promo code WARROOM, you go in the square, you get all the sales, all the discounts, everything. | ||
| Go check it out today. | ||
| Okay, Powell's testifying live. | ||
| We're cutting that. The bombshell is dropping all over over there about the debt ceiling and about the interest rates, how it's going to impact you. | ||
| Like Cortez, that's why Cortez is not on early. | ||
| He's going to come on later. We got that. | ||
| We got the Jim Hoft up. | ||
| He's going to come on in a second. Big news on the election, on election fraud, clean up the elections. | ||
| Darren, if you can hang for a second, I do want to bring Mike Davis in. | ||
| Mike Davis, you should know, He's not just doing his great job in the Supreme Court and all these big issues happening there. | ||
| He's also all over the weaponization committee, and these committees, quite frankly, would just not get any traction. | ||
| I think weaponization is so bad that Axios has a huge story. | ||
| In fact, my team could go to Getter. | ||
| I put it up this morning. | ||
| Axios had scoops all over about the weaponization. | ||
| And Jim Jordan's a good man, but man, it's just not happening over there. | ||
| And also, Mike, you're very close to what's happening on Jason. | ||
| Give me your assessment first, Davis, on Tucker's revelations last night, particularly QAnon Shaman, Sitnik, Epps, all of it, sir. | ||
| Yeah, so the Justice Department has a obligation under the Constitution to provide to defendants exculpatory evidence, evidence that tends to show their innocence. | ||
| And with these thousands and thousands of hours of capital surveillance videos, you have to ask, what did the Justice Department do to obtain these videos, and how did they make these videos available to these January 6th defense attorneys, particularly this Jacob Chinsley? | ||
| His counsel, Jacob Chansley pled guilty in a plea agreement back in September of 2021. | ||
| So the question you have to ask, if you watch these Tucker videos last night, this is clear exculpatory evidence that Jacob Chansley should not be in prison for 41 months. | ||
| This is clear evidence that the Capitol Police escorted him around. | ||
| You have this mentally ill man Who went on the Senate floor... | ||
| Hang on. | ||
| You've got to help me out here. | ||
| Everybody... Merrick Garland knew it. | ||
| These guys know it. They all had access to the footage. | ||
| The J6, our elected congressman, Nancy Pelosi, they had this footage. | ||
| It's not just the QAnon shaman itself, but how do you, what kind of country? | ||
| Is this Russia during the Moscow show trials? | ||
| How could they possibly not just present a J6, but in a criminal proceeding? | ||
| I mean, to me, people that did this should go to prison. | ||
| How do they put an American citizen when you have this footage of the Capitol Police being an escort for the guy? | ||
| It's like the Praetorian Guard. | ||
| One time he's got nine guys there. | ||
| They're taking him and trying to find the doors of the senator open. | ||
| It's not just that, but how did people in authority know this and then prosecute this man and put him in prison? | ||
| Mike Davis. That is a very, very good question that I have been lighting up Twitter on for the last day, and here's the issue. | ||
| Remember, Attorney General Merrick Garland says back on January 4th, he puts out this statement two years into the January 6th investigations, how, quote, one of the largest, most complex, and most resource-intensive investigations in our history, right? | ||
| Okay, so if that's the case, didn't the Biden Justice Department, including the FBI, review This Capitol surveillance video, these thousands and thousands and thousands of hours, did they not review this? | ||
| Now, I understand that they said to these defense attorneys, sure, you can go to the Capitol and look at these videos. | ||
| Well, that's not good enough, right? | ||
| There is a constitutional case called Brady where the prosecutors have to turn over to the defense attorneys exculpatory evidence, right? | ||
| They didn't do that here. | ||
| If you just say here, here's thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of hours of videos from Many different videos across the Capitol, you know, go find the needle in the haystack to help your client when you're a solo practitioner, a solo defense attorney trying to represent a client. | ||
| That's not fair. That's not how it's supposed to work. | ||
| Especially when you have hundreds of FBI agents and they had how many prosecutors working on this case in the Biden Justice Department? | ||
| They should have handed to Jacob Chansley's lawyers this specific video that was shown on Tucker Carlson last night, and they should not have prosecuted him for the charges that they prosecuted him for. | ||
| He should not be in prison for 41 months. | ||
| Yes, people should lose their wealth. | ||
| There's no jury of his peers in this country that would find the guy guilty if they'd seen that. | ||
| I don't even know how they bring the case. | ||
| I think this is impeachable. | ||
| The criminals here are the Justice Department lawyers that did this and the J6 panel. | ||
| Beattie, jump in here for a second. | ||
| Mike, hang on with me to hold through the break. | ||
| Beattie, your thoughts on this one in particular. | ||
| How do they prosecute a guy when the evidence of his innocence is right there? | ||
| Yeah, I mean, it's very shameful. | ||
| The whole exercise, I mean, My understanding, it varies between, you know, case to case as to the January 6th cases. | ||
| But in general, there have been many cases where it doesn't seem like the government has been forthcoming at all with respect to potentially exculpatory evidence. | ||
| And what's even more unfortunate is it doesn't seem like all of the defense lawyers on the counsel side are being as aggressive as one might expect or hope to retrieve this type of exculpatory material, especially material that pertains to the possibility of instigation, incitement, provocation. | ||
| And entrapment. | ||
| There's some kind of hesitation. | ||
| Maybe there's a sense that it would unnecessarily or counterproductively aggravate the government. | ||
| But I think there needs to be a more aggressive push for all of this evidence, all of this footage and for it to be used as part of it. | ||
| Okay. Hang on one second. | ||
| 90 second break. Davis, Beattie, Hopped. | ||
| Next in the War Room. |
Export Selection