March 9, 2023 - Bannon's War Room
48:48
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 lie? | ||
| 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. | |
| Okay, Wednesday, 8th March, Year of the Lord 2023. | ||
| We got the next two hours. | ||
| We're packed wall to wall with some of the most important and biggest developments of the day. | ||
| The great Julie Kelly is going to join us momentarily about the Tucker tapes. | ||
| We got Biggs. | ||
| Andy's been on the floor. Congressman Biggs been on the floor. | ||
| An intense debate today that's going to lead up to this debate on Ukraine about the war powers in Syria, the troops in Syria. | ||
| Matt Gaetz, breakout superstar, in the next hour. | ||
| Starting at 6, I will break down his efforts today. | ||
| Just magnificent. Nat is going to be here about what's going on about the Wuhan lab and COVID-19. | ||
| She's been following this intimately, and she's going to be with us. | ||
| I've got to start with Boris. Boris, thank you for stepping into your meetings. | ||
| A couple of things. Number one. Just the polling, another kind of blowout poll today. | ||
| And I realize some of these are small samples, and the cross tabs might not always add up. | ||
| But I'm just talking directionally. | ||
| Wherever you look, you're just seeing increasing momentum or what I call increasing spread in the numbers. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Boris Epstein. Chief, honored to be with you. | |
| Honored to be with the posse today. | ||
| No doubt about it. And another poll today, this is premise data. | ||
| So that's the 538 project. | ||
| A powerhouse poll. | ||
| Powerhouse poll. President Trump at 52, the next guy at 26, and then Nikki Haley at 7, Pence 5, Cruz 5, the one and only Liz Cheney at 2, and Tim Scott at 1, and head-to-head President Trump defeating the governor of Florida 53 to 37. | ||
| Again, this is premise data. | ||
| 604, 639 registered voters, March 4th to the 7th, 538. | ||
| And this goes to the Emerson poll last night. | ||
| In which President Trump leads in the state of New Hampshire by 41 points. | ||
| Let me say it again. President Trump leads in the state of New Hampshire 58 to 16. | ||
| A robust poll unlike anything that we've seen in a long time. | ||
| What does it mean? | ||
| It means President Trump has won this primary. | ||
| Just like I said yesterday, he's dominated it and won this primary. | ||
| Okay, a couple things. | ||
| Number one, I thought Governor Sununu told us that if the election was held today, just said it on, I think, CNN on Sunday, the election was held today, meaning Sunday, that the same time this is being done, that Governor DeSantis would win handily and that Trump would not win the nomination. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Your thoughts? Fascinating. | |
| Because this poll done by Emerson Polling, March 3rd to March 5th, President Trump 58, the governor of Florida 17, Thad Sununu at 7, Nikki Haley 6, Pence 4, Pompeo 2, Tim Scott 1, Noam 1. | ||
| President Trump beating the next pretender, he's the contender, everyone else is a pretender, he's beating him by 41 points. | ||
| This is Emerson. | ||
| This is not Trafalgar. | ||
| The key thing there also, he wins the majority when they all team up. | ||
| I don't think the Favored Son Act of Governor Sanuda is working out too well according to that early poll, correct? | ||
| It is not working out. | ||
| And the glamorous story on him, can a moderate pro-abortion A Republican win the presidency is not really a big benefit. | ||
| Whoever on the Sununu seated that story, they may be thinking that it's 1992 or 1993. | ||
| It ain't. This is MAGA country. | ||
| We're in MAGA land now. | ||
| MAGA is dominating. | ||
| MAGA is ascendant. | ||
| Okay? So this nonsense of, oh, squishy Republicans, and maybe there's a thread and a needle to thread, and maybe there's a path. | ||
| There's no path. President Trump is the leader of the MAGA movement, the leader of the Republican Party, and the leader of the American people in our country. | ||
| That is the bottom line. | ||
| And everybody else should come together, let's back President Trump, and go and win the White House back. | ||
| That's what we need to do, because otherwise we're looking at our country being completely and totally destroyed. | ||
| Explain, when you say FiveThirtyEight, it's a project of FiveThirtyEight, explain what FiveThirtyEight is and their bona fides, sir. | ||
| FiveThirtyEight is an MSNBC favorite, a Morning Mika, Morning Mike, Morning Joe favorite. | ||
| It's a left of center, Nate Silver founded outlet that never does anything to favor anybody who's close to MAGA, let alone President Trump. | ||
| And here, you've got the president, again, Absolutely, fully, and totally dominating another left-of-center poll. | ||
| And this lines up with political morning consult, lines up with Emerson. | ||
| There's a Newsweek story out today, Steve, and the story says President Trump proved Rupert Murdoch wrong. | ||
| Because now Murdoch was doing all he can to lose his company, to crush his company in that lawsuit. | ||
| Murdoch has now been revealed to us that, oh, President Trump's just going to go away after 2020, and it's just all going to be gone wrong. | ||
| Wrong. And now you have Newsweek. | ||
| This is not the day of the caller. | ||
| This is Newsweek now saying that President Trump proved Rupert Murdoch wrong, going poll to poll to poll. | ||
| President Trump is consistently now in the mid to high 50s, And let's be honest. | ||
| The real polling, President Trump is right about 70 in the primary polls. | ||
| He has won this primary. | ||
| And now it is up to all the other people who would even want to think about ever being in public office to back him and let's go win the White House. | ||
| Okay. Okay, 538 prides itself, and Nate Silver is a pollster. | ||
| It's kind of like Vox. | ||
| They pride themselves in bringing news that's analytically based, right? | ||
| 538 is the polling. | ||
| They're very analytical. | ||
| They pride themselves in analysis. | ||
| Directionally, For our Deplorables and MAGA audience, you're now seeing this breakthrough of 50%. | ||
| One-on-one, they're 30 and 40 point spreads, 25 point spreads. | ||
| But when you add it all up, he's beating the field 52-48, 53-47. | ||
| That's pretty enormous given this early. | ||
| The Newsweek is that Murdoch says in the text messages, going back and forth, that his focus is to make Trump a non-person. | ||
| To make Trump a non-person. | ||
| And that's why Newsweek are saying, hey, President Trump has proved that wrong. | ||
| Now, with all that, as I keep saying, it's the Ken Griffins, it's the McConnell collaborationists, the same guys coming after the collaborationists, the senators coming after Tucker today, and you got Murdoch. | ||
| I think CNBC is saying that the mayor of Miami is being approached by the Schwartzmans of the world, the singers of the world, the owner of the New England Patriots, one of Trump's old buddies, to talk to him about running against President Trump. | ||
| Your thoughts, sir? Well, my number one thought is I guess their previous favorite isn't working out so well for them. | ||
| What happened? They were so excited. | ||
| There was such froth. Maybe the fact that President Trump is dominating in the polling is proving them that these other pretenders just can't compete. | ||
| And this is a total joke. | ||
| The American people are with President Trump. | ||
| They need his experience. | ||
| They need his broad shoulders back in the White House. | ||
| And the fact that now you've got these, let's be honest, CCP-based, CCP-dependent billionaires searching for another candidate tells you something about the Keebler elves, as you call them, Steve. | ||
| It also reminds you a whole lot of 2016 where, well, maybe it's Scott Walker. | ||
| Maybe it's Jeb Bush. Now it's Marco Rubio. | ||
| Wrong. It was President Trump all along. | ||
| It's President Trump now. | ||
| Yeah, they're going to cycle through on Thursday night. | ||
| Jake Tapper, your buddy Jake Tapper, is going to have a town hall with Youngkin. | ||
| He's my best friend. So they're going to cycle through. | ||
| Remember, the permanent access, I just wanted the audience to understand, is the billionaires led by Ken Griffin. | ||
| It is the collaboration of senators and donors of Mitch McConnell, and it's Murdoch. | ||
| Jake Tapper over at CNN is going to have an education town hall live from Washington, D.C. with Governor Youngkin of Virginia. | ||
| I want to assure you I heard you right. | ||
| Governor Youngkin, you said, right? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes, Governor Yunkin. Oh, I don't even see him rating. | |
| I think him and Vivek Ramaswamy are competing for their placement polls. | ||
| You're so brutal. Okay, Boris, how do people get to you? | ||
| How do they get you hot on the gram, sir? | ||
| We're hot all day long, Steve. | ||
| We're winning for the American people. | ||
| That's what matters. That's what President Trump is fighting for all day long. | ||
| Hot on the website, send it right now, boroscp.com. | ||
| Hot on getter at boroscp, on Twitter at boroscp. | ||
| Hot on Twitter at boroscp. Hot on Twitter at boroscp. | ||
| Stay strong, God bless all offense, and I'll talk to you tomorrow. | ||
| I told you, these polls now you're starting to see spreads and it's now consistent. | ||
| These are not Trafalgar, it's not Breitbart, it's not War Room. | ||
| These are, you know, 538, Emerson. | ||
| You're starting to see this kind of consistent pattern. | ||
| Let's have some pattern recognition here. | ||
| Okay, we had the great Julie Kelly. | ||
| She was on Tucker last night. | ||
| Let's play her cold open. | ||
| Julie Kelly is the one journalist in this country who's been following us very closely. | ||
| She would have booked on it. January 6th, the Democrats used the Capitol protest to launch a war on terror against the political right, which is a perfect summation of what actually happened. | ||
| Julie Kelly joins us now. | ||
| Julie, thanks so much for coming on. | ||
| So it dawned on us as these tapes made very clear that the story we've been presented is an absolute fabrication. | ||
| It's a lie. It's a fraud. People may still be in jail on the basis of these lies, and so we wanted to talk to you for an update on where those cases are tonight. | ||
| So, yes, there are, well, at least 100 men have been held under pretrial detention orders over the past two years. | ||
| That means that a judge has denied them bail because the government, DOJ, successfully argued that that individual was a threat to the community. | ||
| This includes, Tucker, people charged with nonviolent offenses like obstruction and conspiracy. | ||
| So, of course, they don't have access to what could very easily be There's exculpatory evidence contained in this video. | ||
| But aside from the now I think around three dozen men who are held under pretrial detention orders, Tucker, believe it or not, there are some men going on 24, 25, 26 months, denied bail, languishing in jail, including the DC Gulag, as the government continues to delay their trials. | ||
| This all has the imprimatur, by the way. | ||
| Of every judge on the D.C. District Court, I want to emphasize the real villains here are the federal judges in Washington, D.C., who have allowed the government to play every single game to keep this evidence out of the hands of defendants, violating their oath of office to protect the rights of defendants and their due process rights. | ||
| So I really want to emphasize that. | ||
| But look, Tucker, there's a thousand criminal defendants right now. | ||
| Half of them have pleaded guilty or been convicted at trial. | ||
| And the government just announced two months ago in January that they were still uploading They call it discovery, which means material related to the entire investigation. | ||
| What they did was arrest people first, find the evidence later, and cover up what could potentially exonerate these defendants. | ||
| If this were happening in any other country, the U.S. State Department would immediately acknowledge that these were violations of the most basic human rights, these are political prisoners, and the U.S. government would condemn it. | ||
| But it's happening here, and it's ignored, except by you. | ||
| And I so appreciate your tireless reporting on this. | ||
| Julie Kelly, thank you. Julie, you are an American hero, acknowledged there by Tucker, who's just done an amazing job. | ||
| We only got a minute in this segment. | ||
| Julie's going to stick around. Andy Biggs just made a magnificent speech on the floor about the Syria situation. | ||
| He's going to join us. First off, the Republican senators are lamb blasting Tucker Carlson. | ||
| Give me a minute on that, Julie Kelly. | ||
| You've been on this from the beginning. | ||
| So following in Chuck Schumer's heels of condemning Tucker Carlson, demanding that the Murdochs take Tucker Carlson off the air, you had Mitch McConnell, of course, always there to play, you know, clean up batter for Chuck Schumer. | ||
| He said he held up a letter from Tom Manger, who is the chief of police for the Capitol Police, saying what a danger this was and how Tucker had misrepresented the clips. | ||
| That he had produced and aired on his show. | ||
| You had Senator Tom Tillis say this is BS. You had Senator Ken Kramer, who last comment about January 6th, he was commending Officer Michael Byrd for the execution of Ashley Babbitt. | ||
| So that's what we get from Republicans in the U.S. Senate. | ||
| Okay, Julie Kelly is going to stick with us. | ||
| The heroic reporting of Julie Kelly, and we're going to talk about Why there was no new footage last night or not a lot of new footage. | ||
| What's going on with the Murdochs and the heroic Tucker Carlson? | ||
| Andy Biggs. There's a massive fight today, debate on troops in Syria. | ||
| All next in The Warrior. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Banner. | |
| Four minutes. | ||
| Speaker, and I thank the gentleman from Florida for sponsoring this legislation. | ||
| You know, there is no legal authority for the U.S. to be involved in the Syrian Civil War. | ||
| There is no authority. | ||
| Section 5C of the War Powers Act does not say, and I'm quoting the chairman now, it does not say, without authorization. | ||
| That's not the language. | ||
| The language says, Specific statutory authority. | ||
| Either to declare war, you have specific statutory authority. | ||
| And you know what that 2001 AUMF says? | ||
| It says those who aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. | ||
| It doesn't say ISIS. It doesn't say Syria. | ||
| It's talking about ISIS. The events of 2001, as the gentleman from Florida just referenced. | ||
| It's a quaint idea. | ||
| It's a quaint idea to say, well, we're going to rely on that 2001 AUMF. I thought they were going to say they were relying on the 2002 AUMF. But either way, neither one works. | ||
| You don't have authority. | ||
| And you're going to be there and put U.S. soldiers in harm's way. | ||
| This is a civil war. | ||
| One Syrian analyst said this recently, quote, until we see the externals confront each other directly rather than on the Syrian ground, I don't see an actual end to the Syrian conflict, close quote. | ||
| You know who the externals are? | ||
| The U.S., Russia, Iran. | ||
| That's the externals. | ||
| And we have no authority to be one of those externals. | ||
| And that analyst went on to say, it's a proxy war. | ||
| And that's what's happening. | ||
| It's another U.S.-Russia proxy war. | ||
| When the Syrian civil war began with protests during the Arab Spring of 2011, U.S. President Obama then said, He went to the regime in Syria and he said, quote, The future of Syria must be determined by its people, but President Bashar al-Assad is standing in the way. | ||
| For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside, close quote. | ||
| Is that our objective? | ||
| Regime change? Is that what it is? | ||
| No, we don't know. | ||
| We don't know what the objective is. | ||
| You can't even define what the exit ramp is. | ||
| Assad responded at that time by fueling the civil war, the exacerbation of that problem, and it has just grown. | ||
| And now you've got us with our allies, the Turks, and our allies, the Kurds. | ||
| They're fighting against each other. | ||
| They don't want each other. | ||
| But ISIS in 2019 was declared to be defeated. | ||
| Even the Inspector General recently said they don't have an ability to cause damage and fear and harm in the homeland. | ||
| And the result is in the last 13 years, the U.S. has spent more than $15 billion on humanitarian aid, and we don't even know what we've spent in Department of Defense costs. | ||
| Do you know why? Because they're grouping it with what's going on in Iraq. | ||
| We tried to obtain information. | ||
| Well, how much have we spent? Well, nobody will tell us. | ||
| When General Milley says, and by the way, he was the architect of that disastrous Afghanistan retreat, and he's a believer in however long, no matter the cost approach in Ukraine, he insists we prolong our involvement in the civil war in Syria in order to help our allies. | ||
| General Milley, who's our allies? | ||
| Is it the Kurds? Is it the Turks? | ||
| Who is it? Is it the Assad regime? | ||
| He can't tell you. | ||
| No one can tell you. | ||
| All of this is being done, though, without legal authority. | ||
| It's time for us to stop fighting proxy wars. | ||
| It's time for us not to say, oh, next time, next time we'll take care of these AUMFs. | ||
| We've had time after time. | ||
| This is the time to get rid of them. | ||
| I urge us to vote for this. | ||
| I yield back. The most powerful debate since the first week of January has been today. | ||
| We're going to cover it in detail at 6 o'clock. | ||
| Matt Gaetz, Anna Paulina Luna. | ||
| But I got to tell you, Congressman Biggs, honored to have you on here. | ||
| Incredible. You talked about the Constitution. | ||
| You talked about... This is what I don't get. | ||
| Congressman Biggs, why has Congress given up its authority about declaring war and to protect the American people? | ||
| It's the people's house. | ||
| What is going on here? Why do we have 22-year... | ||
| These memos that are written that were going off 22 years on these resolutions. | ||
| What is going on in Syria and why is this so important for getting our house in order in Ukraine, sir? | ||
| Well, I mean, let's unpack that, Steve. | ||
| I can't really explain why people believe what they do, but they're relying on authorizations to use military force, which is a derivative of the 1973 War Powers Act. | ||
| And the 1973 War Powers Act is really specific. | ||
| Section 5C says, look, you know, either declare war or you have to have some specific congressional authorization. | ||
| And there is none. | ||
| So when they rely on these, and by the way, we have all kinds of authorizations to use military force that have basically just kind of run on. | ||
| And they use this over and over again because that's what they like to do. | ||
| They want us to be the world's policemen, I guess. | ||
| And the problem with it is, I think the 1973 War Powers Act really stretches congressional credulity. | ||
| And they want to then stretch that even further. | ||
| And then it gets us into Syria. | ||
| And to unpack that, Steve, here's the way to think of that. | ||
| It started off as a protest in the Arab Spring for pro-democratic anti-Assad. | ||
| And before you knew it, Assad gets nervous because Obama talks about regime change. | ||
| He wants to get rid of Assad. | ||
| So Assad, some people have surmised that he gets nervous. | ||
| So he attacks Militarily, his own people. | ||
| Now, that splinters into over 100 groups, and they get weapons from their neighbors, other countries, and they start attacking. | ||
| You have a civil war going on there, and Assad's in trouble. | ||
| And so the US, with its coalition that we're fighting in Iraq, we come in and we start Attacking, they're kind of helping the rebel insurgents. | ||
| And then we also want to protect, we start getting involved with our friends, which became known as the Syrian Defense Forces. | ||
|
unidentified
|
They're the Kurds! One of our coalition members are the Turks. | |
| And the Turks say, you know what? | ||
| The Kurds are terrorists. | ||
| And so now we've created this friction between two allies. | ||
| In the meantime, Russia comes in with Iran. | ||
| And you've got this smoldering cauldron of a civil war and anarchy going on. | ||
| We ran over 11,000 sorties, air sorties there. | ||
| We've had thousands of troops there. | ||
| And right now we're down to 900 troops. | ||
| And the reason that that's a problem and why I think some of these people say, well, if we get out of there, then the Russian troops are going to go to Ukraine. | ||
| That's not true because they still have to deal with the civil war that's going on and the unrest that's there. | ||
| So Russia will stay in with Iran to protect them. | ||
| By the way, our being there has caused Iran to get a foothold, and Israel just a couple days ago took out A spy center in a neighborhood located in Damascus in Syria. | ||
| So this thing is a cauldron there, and our presence exacerbated the problem, and we're doing it without authority. | ||
| My argument to these guys is if you want to be there, come make the case on the floor and let's have a vote. | ||
| Don't say we'll do it next time. | ||
| Do it today. Congressman Biggs, your staff's telling us you've got a punch. | ||
| I want to have you back on so we can drill down on this because this is important, about the People's House and the power to declare war, also what this means for the other proxy war in Ukraine that's only getting crazier and crazier. | ||
| I talk about the Nord Stream 2. | ||
| Congressman Biggs, we're going to play this again on our site. | ||
| How do people get to you, your social media, and your website to find out more about this debate on Syria and the War Powers Act? | ||
| Yeah, Biggs.house.gov is my official site, but you can follow me at RepAndyBiggsAZ, and that will get you to most of my social media. | ||
| But thanks for having me, Steve. | ||
| I got to tell you, for America's first national security policy, today was a big day. | ||
| You and Gates and Luna and others were magnificent. | ||
| It was incredible. So thank you very much. | ||
| I break it down even further. | ||
| In the next hour, we're going to have also Congressman McCall's speech on the floor, also Ryan Zinke, that gives the opposition. | ||
| They want to stay. In fact, I think some of McCall would like to increase it. | ||
| We're not going to get control of the defense budget. | ||
| We're not going to, you know, the convergence of the geopolitical military conflict in the debt ceiling and spending. | ||
| You're not going to get these under control until you get under control our Objectives and commitments. | ||
| The only way to do this is start taking commitments off. | ||
| You've got to start in Syria. | ||
| This one's a no-brainer. Julie Kelly, thank you. | ||
| I've got a couple minutes. I want to hold you through the break also, but just talk to people about... | ||
| You've been at this for two years. | ||
| Your book's magnificent. You've been doing the pick-and-shovel worker reporting. | ||
| How important and how blown away were you, given you know this better than anybody, about Monday Night and Tucker Carlson, ma'am? | ||
| Well, thank you for that, Steve. | ||
| I was pretty blown away watching what happened with Jacob Chansley because I've followed his case since the spring of 2021. | ||
| I consider it a travesty. | ||
| It's really a heartbreaking story. | ||
| He's got some mental health issues. | ||
| He spent 300 plus days in solitary confinement before this ruthless, vengeful DOJ tormented him into a plea deal. | ||
| on obstruction of an official proceeding. | ||
| What official proceeding? | ||
| Now we see from the video that he was doing nothing. | ||
| There was nothing going on. | ||
| He was led through the Capitol at numerous vantage points by Capitol Police. | ||
| So a judge sentenced him to 41 months in jail. | ||
| He has been in prison now since January 2021. | ||
| And I guess he's scheduled to get out in a few months. | ||
| So I think the Ray Epps thing is very interesting. | ||
| That means that Ray Epps was technically on restricted grounds for over an hour and a half that day, not just the hour that he had told the January 6th committee where he was. | ||
| And he was interacting with protesters, and he was there when there were clashes with police and protesters. | ||
| And I've heard judges condemn people who didn't step in and halt some of those clashes and conversations. | ||
| But overall, it's shifting the narrative big time. | ||
| And you can see that's why people like Chuck Schumer are completely mounting down. | ||
| Julie, hang on for one second. | ||
| Julie Kelly from American Greatness. | ||
| She's been covering this every day since the beginning. | ||
| She's going to join us. Natalie Winders is here about the COVID hearings. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All of it next. Julie, Kelly, how can they keep this? | |
| First off, the lawyers for QAnon Shaman said anything? | ||
| Did they get access to this footage, which shows you nine Capitol Hill policemen walking him around, checking all the doors of the Senate, trying to get him inside? | ||
| It was shocking. And you said he spent a year in solitary confinement. | ||
| Has his lawyers said that they were given access to this? | ||
| So Albert Watkins, his attorney who represented him through the plea deal, he came out apparently yesterday or today and said that he had not seen that surveillance video. | ||
| I checked the other day on Jacob's docket what video clips were entered into evidence for the government's sentencing memorandum. | ||
| There were only four surveillance video clips. | ||
| Two of them were outside. | ||
| So it's very unlikely, based on that evidence now what Mr. | ||
| Watkins is saying, that he saw exactly Jacob Chansley's movements with Capitol Police throughout the building that afternoon. | ||
| How can they get away with it? | ||
| Because these judges are snakes, because they are all in cahoots. | ||
| They're a rubber stamp for this DOJ. They are the real villains here, as I told Tucker last night. | ||
| They are the ones, I'm telling you, I know Republicans have their plate full. | ||
| It would be nice to call one or two of these judges up on impeachment because they are completely violating their duty of office to protect the rights of these defendants, let the government run roughshod over these people. | ||
| In a city that voted 92 percent for Joe Biden, the very idea that even these jury trials are ongoing in Washington, D.C. is a disgrace. | ||
| The judges should have changed the venue for every single one of these trials, especially the high-profile ones, but they refused to do so. | ||
| Was Monday night a game-changer in your mind, given your knowledge and work on this? | ||
| I guess the question is, because last night, obviously, there was going to be other footage or wasn't. | ||
| Do you believe it will continue, or do you believe they're going to try to shut Tucker down? | ||
| No, I mean, I think that this was actually kind of snowballing, Steve, even before Monday night. | ||
| You had the Rasmussen poll that came out last week, the stunning poll that said 80 percent of Americans, including I think 78 percent of Democrats, want to see all the surveillance video. | ||
| 61 percent of Americans, including almost a majority of Democrats, think that undercover federal agents provoked the events of January 6th. | ||
| So this narrative was already unraveling before Monday night. | ||
| And I think what Tucker did was just light a complete match to this entire thing, which is why they're desperate to try to salvage it and to criminalize what Tucker is doing. | ||
| You have Chuck Schumer saying, I order the Murdochs to take Tucker Carlson off the air on Tuesday night. | ||
| I mean, this is banana Republic style, Marxist tactics. | ||
| And it's not because they are, you know, they're not worried about Jacob Chansley. | ||
| They are terrified and panicked, especially with House Republicans now investigating various aspects of January 6th. | ||
| They are completely terrified that this is all going to fall apart very quickly as the government scrambles to continue to investigate and arrest people and put them on trial. | ||
| Julie, how do people get to you, your site, your book, and particularly your social media, which is, if you want to keep up with this, you're putting stuff up all the time. | ||
| Right, so I post a lot on Twitter, Julie underscore Kelly, too. | ||
| I'm on Truth Social and getter at Julie underscore Kelly, although I don't do a lot there. | ||
| I should, but only so much I can do. | ||
| All my work's at AmericanGreatnessAmGreatness.com, and my book is available on Amazon. | ||
| It's entitled January 6th. | ||
| There it is. How Democrats use Capitol protests to launch a war on terror. | ||
| I have to look at it because it's so long. | ||
| Julie, incredible, incredible reporting. | ||
| So thank you very much for coming on. | ||
| Appreciate it. Thanks for covering all my work, Steve. | ||
| Thanks. This is the great battle against the administrative state. | ||
| It's only going to get more intense. | ||
| We'll see if they allow Tucker to put up more footage tonight. | ||
| I'm hearing all kind of, you know, we don't want to report anything yet, but Tucker is really fighting the fight right there. | ||
| So I have his back. These collaboration as Republicans in the Senate are outrageous. | ||
| You see, every one of your enemies is coming forward now. | ||
| We're smoking them out. Let's play. | ||
| We've got a cold open for Natalie Winters on what happened today on Capitol Hill on COVID. Let's go ahead and play. | ||
| We'll bring Natalie in. As COVID-19 began to spread across the world, there were two competing hypotheses about the origin of this virus that needed to be vigorously explored. | ||
| The first hypothesis is the possibility that COVID-19 infections in humans were the result of a spillover event from nature. | ||
| This is a situation in which the virus naturally mutates and becomes more transmissible from one species to another, in this case from bats to humans via an intermediate species. | ||
| This is what happened in previous outbreaks of SARS and MERS and earlier coronaviruses that emerged from bats and spread through an intermediate animal. | ||
| The second hypothesis is the possibility that the virus evolved in a laboratory involved in gain-of-function research. | ||
| This is a type of research in which scientists seek to increase the transmissibility or pathogenicity of an organism in order to better understand that organism and inform preparedness efforts and the development of countermeasures such as therapeutics and vaccines. | ||
| Under this theory, COVID infected the general population after it was accidentally leaked from a lab in China. | ||
| From the earliest days of the pandemic, my view was both theories about the origin needed to be aggressively and thoroughly examined. | ||
| Based on my initial analysis of the data, I came to believe, and I still believe today, that it indicates that COVID-19 more likely was the result of an accidental lab leak than a result of a natural spillover event. | ||
| This conclusion is based primarily on the biology of the virus itself, including the rapid high infectivity for human-to-human transmission, which would then predict rapid evolution of new variants, as well as a number of other important factors, which also include the unusual actions in and around Wuhan in the fall of 2019, all of which I'm happy to discuss today. | ||
| Even given the information that surfaced in three years since the COVID-19 pandemic began, some have contended that there's really no point in investigating the origin of this virus. | ||
| I strongly disagree. | ||
| There is a global need to know what we are dealing with in COVID virus because it affects how we approach the problem to try to prevent the next pandemic. | ||
| The understanding of the origin of COVID is critical to future science research, particularly as it affects ongoing ethical debate around gain-of-function research. | ||
| Gain-of-function research has long been controversial within the scientific community. | ||
| In my own opinion, the COVID-19 pandemic presents a case study on the potential dangers of such research. | ||
| While many believe that gain-of-function research is critical to get ahead of viruses by developing vaccines, in this case, I believe it was the exact opposite. | ||
| Unleashing a new virus to the world without any means of stopping it and resulting in the deaths of millions of people. | ||
| Because of this, it's my opinion that we should call for a moratorium on gain-of-function research until we have a broader debate And we come to a consensus at a community about the value of gain-of-function research. | ||
| This debate should not be limited to the scientific community. | ||
| If the decision is to continue with gain-of-function research, then it must be determined how and where to conduct that research in a safe, responsible and effective way. | ||
| I thank you for inviting me here today. | ||
| As we explore this important topic, I look forward to answering your questions. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Twenty seconds left. Dr. Fauci was affirmatively told in an email that NIH had a monetary relationship with the Wuhan Institute through EcoHealth Alliance. | |
| He was told this in January 27th of 2020. | ||
| Do you think that Dr. Fauci intentionally lied under oath to Senator Paul when he vehemently denied NIH's funding of gain-of-function research? | ||
| I think there's no doubt that NIH was funding gain-of-function research. | ||
| Is it likely that American tax dollars funded the gain of function research that created this virus? | ||
| I think it did, not only from NIH, but from the State Department, USAID, and from DOD. I'm out of time. | ||
| Thank you very much. I'm not so sure it gets any more explosive than this. | ||
| Natalie Winters, talk to us about who, tell the audience, particularly podcasts and radio that couldn't see the screen, who this individual was and why this was so explosive today, ma'am. | ||
| Sure. So that's the former CDC director, Robert Redfield. | ||
| And I have to say, usually when I watch C-SPAN, when I'm watching these congressional hearings, I don't usually have a hard time having to pick out which clips to include because there's usually only like one smoking gun moment or one really, really, really bombshell-dropping witness. | ||
| But in this case, this hearing which happened for the House Select Subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic, really everything that came out of Dr. | ||
| Redfield's mouth was explosive. | ||
| And remember, he's the former CDC director, which is a very, very, very high-level position. | ||
| But what we saw today, and like I said, I really had to be selective with what I showed you, I think this is the last final piece of evidence to really make the conclusive case That the National Institutes of Health, which kind of represents, | ||
| I would argue, the American establishment, the biomedical industrial complex, really partnered with the Chinese Communist Party, gave them really the biological ammunition to wage biological warfare on the United States. | ||
| And what I mean by that is particularly honing in on this term, gain-of-function research, which is, of course, a term that the War Room audience knows all too well. | ||
| We've been talking about this for well over two years, but it has to do with making viruses deadlier, more lethal, more virulent, more transmissible. | ||
| To humans, particularly by playing around with them in humanized mice models. | ||
| And what's so interesting is that the humanized mice models that they were using to conduct the research overseas in Wuhan, these were models that were supplied by the University of North Carolina, a researcher named Ralph Baric. | ||
| But that's really just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to how I would argue the NIH, the NIAID, led by Anthony Fauci, really were collaborationists. | ||
| with the Chinese Communist Party in terms of the creation of COVID. And the other really interesting angle, because again, the War Room audience knows, right, that COVID was a result of coming out of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. | ||
| That's a given. But what's really interesting and where you really, I think, find where the bodies are buried is the cover-up, right, of the origins of COVID, particularly who went to bat for Anthony Fauci and in parts the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| And Dr. Redfield, it's worth, you can go on Twitter and look at some of the clips, He really details, and really I would argue excruciating detail, and it's painful to really understand the lengths to which Anthony Fauci and his colleagues at the National Institutes of Health went to. | ||
| To silence him just because he wasn't a fanboy of the natural origins theory, not including him in meetings, not including him in phone calls. | ||
| So I think it really proves the point that we've been saying from the beginning, which is this mantra of trust the science, trust the experts, really was just a projection because these people were not driven by facts, not driven by reality. | ||
| They were driven by an effort to cover up their own wrongdoings and, of course, keep the Chinese Communist Party in power. | ||
| We're going to go to break. I want you to hang on. | ||
| But at the end of your clip, too, is it now proven that he basically said Fauci perjured himself under oath? | ||
| Did I take that correctly, ma'am? | ||
| Exactly. He definitively says that it was gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which Anthony Fauci repeatedly said. | ||
| Not only the first hearing, it was that he never funded Wuhan. | ||
| Then once we revealed that, no, he actually did. | ||
| Then he said, oh, well, it wasn't gain-of-function. | ||
| So he's perjured himself multiple times, multiple times. | ||
| Natalie Winters, hang on. | ||
| We're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| Like I said, today on Capitol Hill, absolutely explosive. | ||
| Other hearings going on, too. | ||
| In the second hour, I'm going to show you the House going after Powell. | ||
| So there's so much happening right here now in the capital city as people try to get to the bottom of all this, the debt ceiling, the spending, the financial crisis in our capital markets, also the war, bring the troops home from Syria, what's going to happen, the War Powers Act. | ||
| In Ukraine, and then on top of it, finally getting some truth. | ||
| Three years. | ||
| Three years. It's taken us to get here. | ||
| Three years on the bioweapon that came out of the Wuhan lab. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All next in the war room. Better 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, MyPillow.com, you're not going to get many hours of sleep, but you've got to get great quality sleep because you're manning the ramparts here at the Worm. | ||
| So go to MyPillow.com, promo code Worm. | ||
| The MyPillow 2.0 is up. | ||
| It's on fire. Actually, it's cool, but the sales are on fire. | ||
| So go check it out, the Armory Piercing Shell that is on fire. | ||
| Mike Lindell, his great company up there in Minnesota that they're trying to put out of business every day. | ||
| MyPillow.com, promo code WARROOM. You get the MyPillow 2.0. | ||
| Buy one, get one free. | ||
| You will love this pillow. | ||
| If you loved the MyPillow 1.0, you're really going to love this. | ||
| So go check it out. Plus, we go to our square. | ||
| They've got all kinds of other sales. | ||
| Discounts, sales, buy one, get one free. | ||
| Go check it out. Natalie, just one day. | ||
| We're going to have Natalie. We're going to produce it. | ||
| A little more for the mark because it's so important what went on today with the Twitter feed and the clips. | ||
| But I just want to make sure everybody understands something. | ||
| The University of North Carolina and Obama's National Security Council shut down gain-of-function. | ||
| Fauci went over and wormed his way into the EOB and got it back up. | ||
| When you talk about gain-of-function, it's basically creating bioweapons, but they say it's for scientific research. | ||
| It's really directed evolution. | ||
| And it puts these viruses tens or hundreds of thousands of years in the future, right? | ||
| The probability that this would happen in nature are so remote. | ||
| That's why you say that we have this fancy term gain of function, but it's essentially the core element of the biological weapons program. | ||
| Is that the general concept, Natalie? | ||
| Yeah, it's probably the greatest euphemism in recent history. | ||
| Whichever PR firm was tasked to come up with this term really did a good job because it doesn't do justice to what exactly the purpose of gain of function is. | ||
| And I think it's really interesting to, you know, you bring up the people like Ralph Baric, right? | ||
| The people at UNC Chapel Hill who made careers and made millions of dollars, got millions of your taxpayer dollars to conduct this research. | ||
| They've really enjoyed this pandemic. | ||
| Not only has their power increased, but take Ralph Barrett, for example. | ||
| He's the guy that supplied the humanized mice models to Wuhan. | ||
| He's a name that's come up from the mouth of Senator Rand Paul when he was questioning Anthony Fauci. | ||
| It's very interesting because after we had started to expose his involvement with this gain-of-function research and what was going on, his partnership with Wuhan, Believe it or not, he got a six-figure grant from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, the very same group that was not only funding the Center for Tech and Civic Life, which helped rig the 2020 election through mail-in ballots, but also, of course, Mark Zuckerberg. | ||
| And what's really interesting, and I think sort of a marker that the war room needs to lay down right now, is when you hear Dr. | ||
| Redfield talk about gain-of-function research and potentially instituting a ban, That's only coming from the federal government side of things, right? | ||
| They would only ban federal money, your taxpayer dollars, from going to gain-of-function research, which is great, and that's a great step forward. | ||
| But as we've seen, this pandemic I think really has only, I would say, sped up, really accelerated the collaboration between the public and private sectors, particularly in the fields of science and scientific research. | ||
| So I think that we also need to make sure that we ban funds from groups like the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and these very transhumanist groups, these kind of, you know, pandemic prevention racketeering organizations from funding gain-of-function research, too. | ||
| What's very important, the reason I wanted to have them on back-to-back, Julie Kelly and Natalie Winters. | ||
| Julie's been all over the J6 situation for two years now. | ||
| Natalie Winters has been all over The COVID, the biological weapons, all of it, the Wuhan lab, for three years now. | ||
| In the last 24 to 48 hours, there's just been amazing revelations. | ||
| That lay into everything we've been talking about and these two women have been talking about for the last couple of years. | ||
| And it's all coming to fruition. | ||
| And quite frankly, it's shocking. | ||
| When Natalie Winters, as experienced as she is, says, I can sit there and watch these hearings and there's a bombshell every couple of minutes, people should listen. | ||
| Natalie, your social media and all of it, we'll have you back on a kickoff of the show tomorrow because I really want to get into the details of this. | ||
| It's so explosive. How do people get to you, ma'am? | ||
| Well, I was going to say I thought the reason you had me and Julie on was because you were celebrating International Women's Day, but I don't think we celebrate that UN false flag here in the war room. | ||
| But you can find me on social media at Natalie G. Winters on all platforms. | ||
| Every day is Women's Day here. | ||
| You guys do all the heavy lifting. | ||
| I mean, you and Julie are just two hammers. | ||
| Natalie, thank you. Look forward to seeing you back here tomorrow morning. | ||
| Incredible. This gain-of-function thing, this weaponization is just outrageous. | ||
| Krom Carmichael, let's finish with an update. | ||
| By the way, next hour, we're going to get into the details with Matt. | ||
| We're going to have Matt Gaetz break down everything that happened on the floor today. | ||
| It's pretty intense. Also about what happened with Powell today. | ||
| Also, the situation in Ukraine. | ||
| They're blaming now some Ukrainian scuba group or some affiliated group. | ||
| with the blowing up of the Nord Stream Tour and getting to all of that. | ||
| Crom Carmichael, make me feel better. | ||
| Protect people's hearts with soul tea. | ||
| Go ahead, brother. Steve, thanks again. | ||
| Thanks so much for having me. | ||
| I talk about soul tea whenever you let me, and soul tea is a It's a super enriched green tea extract where we take a particular molecule from green tea and we extract that and we enrich it to a 22 % concentration and that will help manage your cholesterol and it will also, that's what our clinical trials show and it's also how it's worked for me personally and a lot of our members. | ||
| But it also, heart disease is the number one killer. | ||
| And even during COVID, heart disease killed more people each year than COVID did. | ||
| And it's called the secret killer because it sneaks up on people. | ||
| And heart disease generally happens over a 10-, 15-, 20-year period. | ||
| And people have a heart attack. | ||
| It's the first time they've even known they had a heart disease. | ||
| And half the time they die. | ||
| And so I would encourage your listeners, the posse, to come to warroomhealth.com. | ||
| That's warroomhealth.com, and that'll take them straight to Soul Tea, and when they order the subscription and use the War Room code at checkout, that's the War Room code at checkout, they'll get $29.95 off their first shipment, and they'll get on their ongoing shipments, you get three bottles for the price of two, and we pay the shipping. | ||
| And you can't do anything better for your own health than to take care of your heart. | ||
| Take care of your heart. It's the most important thing you've got, that heart, everything. | ||
| Krom, thank you so much. | ||
| One more time, how do people get there to check everything out, get all the information? | ||
| Warroomhealth.com. | ||
| That's warroomhealth.com and use the code WARROOM at checkout. | ||
| To get the discount on the initial shipment, and then the subscription, three bottles for the price of two comes every 90 days. | ||
| Carmichael, thank you very much, brother. | ||
| Thank you. Stick around. |
Export Selection