June 15, 2023 - Bannon's War Room
47:54
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is what you're fighting for. | ||
| I mean, every day you're out there. | ||
| What they're doing is blowing people off. | ||
| If you continue to look the other way and shut up, then the oppressors, the authoritarians, get total control and total power. | ||
| Because this is just like in Arizona. | ||
| This is just like in Georgia. It's another element that backs them into a quarter and shows their lies and misrepresentations. | ||
| This is why this audience is gonna have to get engaged. | ||
| As we've told you, this is the fight. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All this nonsense, all this spin, they can't handle the truth. | |
| War Room, Battleground. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Okay, welcome. It is Thursday, 15 June, Year of Our Lord, 2023. | ||
| We've got a lot to get to, and we're going to get to it all. | ||
| I've got Colonel Derek Harvey and Naomi Wolf. | ||
| We're going to spend some time with on the urgent topics of the day. | ||
| Colonel Harvey, we start this morning's show at 10 o'clock. | ||
| We had Rogan O'Hanley, who goes by the handle DC Drano, one of the top influencers in the MAGA movement. | ||
| We were talking about Anna Paulina Luna. | ||
| She had this resolution up, this bill that would basically be the expulsion of shift from Congress. | ||
| Also, it would have a $16 million fine, a lot of controversy, 20 Republicans voted against it. | ||
| Some of those were given these kind of intellectual arguments about the Constitution, but others were just, hey, we don't want to go off the shift, we think it's too much, etc. | ||
| Heading that list was Mike Turner of Ohio, I think the former mayor of Dayton, Republican Ohio, who is chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. | ||
| And this is quite disturbing. You gotta help me, you gotta help our audience understand something. | ||
| How is House Intel that went from Devin Nunez and yourself and others to SHIFT and all the problems we had in the first term came from or after 18 came from SHIFT and SHIFT lying to the American people. | ||
| Now we fought hard and took back the house and house intelligence is not only not doing anything, And shutting down investigations. | ||
| But Mike Turner is out there at the forefront saying we shouldn't hold Schiff accountable for his criminal and illegal activity as head of House Intelligence. | ||
| Your thoughts, sir? Well, it's no surprise because I worked with Mike Turner. | ||
| He was an obstacle to doing the things that Devin Nunes wanted to do to move everything forward. | ||
| Mike Turner is from Ohio, the Dayton, Ohio area. | ||
| He is a neocon internationalist globalist. | ||
| He is in no way a conservative economic-oriented person or a follow the constitution, you know, protect the American freedoms and liberties from overreach by DOJ, FBI, CIA, etc. | ||
| He is a proponent of increasing state authoritative powers in these areas. | ||
| He's never lifted a finger. | ||
| He portrays himself once in a while by posturing on some legal, arcane legal argument in defense of liberties. | ||
| But he's not ever in the trenches fighting for anything. | ||
| He never wanted to address Schiff. | ||
| He wanted us to back off on our efforts while Devin was there. | ||
| One of the first things he did when he took over as the chairman in January Was to reach out and start having lunches and saying, it was all Devin's fault that we had these problems. | ||
| Looking the other way and saying, my number one objective is to repair our relationship with Adam Schiff, who lied, lied to the American people, did things about leaking to the specific media, | ||
| inferring that he had substantive evidence that was based upon classified collection to support his assertions about Trump having been supported by Russia and Putin. | ||
| So he went right down the list. | ||
| He's a Boehner Republican. | ||
| He's not a real Republican in my view. | ||
| And he just postures in order to get elected. | ||
| And he was chosen- Hang on, slow down, we get to all this. | ||
| Number one, he's mayor of Dayton. | ||
| He looks like a career politician. | ||
| Does he have any previous military national security experience, international experience at all, or just basically mayor of Dayton and a political apparatchik, sir? | ||
| Businessman. And, you know, his focus has always been just on the U.S. Air Force Intelligence Center located in his district. | ||
| That's at Wright-Patterson? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes, and he's focused on Europe. | |
| Yeah. Europe, and he's a total... | ||
| Okay, but I want to get to this. | ||
| I want to get to this. Naomi was going to be on her in a second, and her fight, right? | ||
| And Robert, their fight against the biomedical insurance industrial complex is this massive complex that they're fighting every day, part of the administrative state and the deep state. | ||
| The National Security Defense Intelligence apparatus is another massive component of that. | ||
| And what they do, and you see this all the time, is they lure these rubes in and have them to the cocktail parties in Georgetown, have them to the dinner and say, you know, you're so smart, this is amazing, you're really on top of this, and they lure them in. | ||
| And what you have is these people come from the hinterland and they get sucked into the system. | ||
| And the next thing you know, they're not just defending the system, they're the strongest defenders of the system. | ||
| Go back to what you said. | ||
| He told you that one of the biggest things they had to do was to build a relationship with Adam Schiff? | ||
| Correct. Now, keep in mind, and we tried to remind him, that the House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee's creation Was to protect Americans from overreach. | ||
| Remember the Frank Church Committee and the overreach in the 1970s? | ||
| And so oversight and reining in the administrative state with all of the violations we've seen by the FBI, the National Security Division, CIA, the National Security Agency collecting 278,000 Hits on Americans in an unauthorized way and illegal. | ||
| The fabrication and lies presented to the FISA courts. | ||
| All of these things, he's AWOL. He fights for the administrative state in the inside of our government. | ||
| Walk through. You were there. | ||
| I mean, you were there with Nunez. | ||
| You came to the White House. | ||
| You went back. Walk people through the crimes of Adam Schiff and what Adam Schiff did to tear this nation apart with lies. | ||
| Not with reality, not with intelligence, not with information, but with bald-faced lies. | ||
| Walk me through. Because not hold Adam Schiff accountable in a very basic thing. | ||
| I tell people, That is a little hanging fruit. | ||
| Do you think you're going to take down the biomedical industry that's choking out this country? | ||
| Do you think you're going to take on the national security? | ||
| If you can't censure and fine Adam Schiff, then what are we even doing here? | ||
| And there were 20, and they were all McCarthy acolytes. | ||
| This was a McCarthy shot across Trump's bow to let him know who's really in charge here. | ||
| So walk me through, though. Was this a close call about censoring Schiff? | ||
| Are you holding him accountable for the $32 million he spent on this bogus investigation? | ||
| It's not a close call if you're going to be an objective person and looking at it. | ||
| And the suggested fine was not a mandatory fine. | ||
| And so anybody who points to that, you know, as a reason not to vote for it, it did not have the force of law in it, okay? | ||
| But the censoring of him was needed. | ||
| Now let's just go back to something like the first impeachment trial. | ||
| It was given to the House Intelligence Committee and Adam Schiff chaired that for the Democrats. | ||
| We would have depositions leading up to it and before we were through deposing the individual, negative information about that deposition spun in a way to Hurt the President was leaked before we even would get out of a block of the deposition. | ||
| And it was hitting CNN and elsewhere. | ||
| That was on the authority of Adam Schiff and his team. | ||
| That's one. He continued to lie and misrepresent what the committee held and what we were finding out. | ||
| And the lapdogs of the media were gobbling it up. | ||
| and then spewing it out to the American public in such a way as to poison the atmosphere with lies, misinformation, and spin. | ||
| Those two things and continuing to say that he had evidence and we would have the former DNI in General Clapper or we'd have Brennan in or we would have Susan Rice in other hearings, depositions, and he would go ahead and say, We've got all this evidence. | ||
| We've got all this evidence. | ||
| He had zero evidence. | ||
| And the Republicans adhered to the rules and we didn't talk about what we were hearing. | ||
| Walk me through Turner's covering something here also. | ||
| It's not just he wants a rapprochement with Schiff. | ||
| I want people to understand that he wants a rapprochement with someone who's a criminal, and someone who had criminal activity, and used the intelligence apparatus of our nation to turn it against his political enemies. | ||
| Mike Turner wants a rapprochement with that. | ||
| But he's also doing another thing. | ||
| They don't want to go after Sequoia, and they don't want to go after the money source for the Democratic Party. | ||
| So let's talk about that. Mike Turner is specifically, we're calling Mike Turner out, and anybody in Mike Turner's district that is MAGA or Republican, Quite frankly, anybody, even Democrats, you've got to understand how the system works and what they're doing. | ||
| He is covering for the Chinese Communist Party's the way they take your pension money, the American people, working class people's pension money, and turn it against you by shipping the factories over or getting all the great technology over, in this case, funding Their defense business and the artificial intelligence specifically that goes into the defense industry is through this mechanism with Neil Shen and the people at Sequoia. | ||
| Why is Mike Turner not exposing Sequoia? | ||
| Why is Mike Turner not doing an investigation of Sequoia? | ||
| Is Mike Turner in this regard protecting Democrats or is there something more insidious? | ||
| Colonel Harvey? I think he's protecting the Uniparty that benefits from Wall Street money, globalist money, and massive donations from people that work for and are associated directly with Sequoia Capital. | ||
| That's the nub of it. | ||
| He is not personally interested in China or East Asia issues either. | ||
| Mike Gallagher, congressman, is the one who's focused on China, but more in a traditional geostrategic way, not how China is undermining the economic security and national security of the American people or in going after consumer fraud, Wall Street investment market fraud, conspiracy to undermine institutional investors and things like that, espionage through Sequoia access points. | ||
| All of those things and the intelligence that would help in that arena through an oversight investigation is where Devin Nunes Had the committee going. | ||
| And Mike Turner shut it all down within three weeks of taking over the committee. | ||
| Why is the big question? | ||
| If you look at the Sequoia money, it benefits him and some of the McCarthy acolytes and the donors. | ||
| And the number one donor to the McCarthy Victory Fund were the Sequoia-associated people. | ||
| Hold it. Hang on. Hang on. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. | ||
| The number one donor to McCarthy's victory front were people associated with Sequoia or Sequoia itself? | ||
| Yes. And it's in the FCC reports. | ||
| You just have to look for it. | ||
| You need to know the names and who they are. | ||
| We will get that and drill down with Natalie on that and come back. | ||
| Colonel Harvey... How do we break this logjam? | ||
| I mean, now, this is outrageous. | ||
| There's so many of these investigations that have to happen. | ||
| We're in control of the House. | ||
| We don't want a rapprochement with Schiff. | ||
| Right? Shift has already been bounced off of intelligence, correct? | ||
| That was one of the first moves. But that also was a little bit performative because he's still got his acolytes on there. | ||
| He's still got a lot of control. We don't need to want a rapprochement with Shift. | ||
| We want Shift held accountable. | ||
| And by holding him accountable, you're going to make sure he's not in the United States Senate, just to make sure there's a function here, there's an endgame for our task and purpose. | ||
| What should people do about Mike Turner? | ||
| Well, I think Mike Turner needs to be called out. | ||
| Local media and conservatives within that district need to find an alternative candidate to Mike Turner. | ||
| They need to damage him in that if they can't beat him, they need to call him out and know that he's going to be threatened. | ||
| If he's not going to go down this time, we need to take him down in 2026. | ||
| That's the way I look at it. | ||
| Now, the other things that I would do, you know, Representative Comer and Representative Jordan agreed I think mistakenly to accept a redacted sit-down discussion about this memo, okay, that it turns out they redacted the most critical information that was in there. | ||
| You cannot trust Director Wray on any of these things. | ||
| That's one of the things we learned early on, and everyone should know that. | ||
| Everyone should know that. | ||
| The other things we should be doing, there's 10,000, over 10,000 programs that are not authorized by the Congress that were authorized once they lapsed and we continue to fund them. | ||
| If they're not authorized, they should not be funded. | ||
| We should also be defunding rules and we should also be demanding more aggressively documents and depositions and apply the Holman rule to defund specific persons billets that are not doing the job and have violated and have not been held accountable For example, in the FBI or DOJ who misrepresented information to the FISA courts or did other things. | ||
| We need to go after those individuals because Director Wray and Attorney General Garland are not holding anyone accountable, and we know why. | ||
| Are you, since I know we think that the House Intelligence is doing nothing, Are you satisfied or unsatisfied where both judiciary and oversight are right now in their investigations? | ||
| And if you're not satisfied, what needs to be done? | ||
| They still need a more aggressive staff. | ||
| The Democrat Party under Pelosi would have had significant staff, equivalent to the January 6th committee staff, Or others that we've had in the past, they have not even done that. | ||
| It is micro-staff augmentation, if that. | ||
| The bandwidth and the challenges for the staffs that are there and all the issues that have to be addressed, it's too much. | ||
| So you can't get through all the homework, the investigations, the preliminary work that has to be done, the demands for documents, understanding the documents, then doing the depositions and building your case upward. | ||
| That work, that hard work is not being done. | ||
| The communication strategies are not being done. | ||
| We're failing in communication strategies to get it out there to the American public. | ||
| And we shouldn't be satisfied with getting it in some of our conservative journals. | ||
| We should be pushing to release more of the documents and demanding the documents, and particularly pushing to get this 1026 FBI document released. | ||
| It's not classified. We are not doing a good job on the communication scheme. | ||
| As an example, the seriousness, the bandwidth issues, the resources issues, the organization issues, I think all still need to be significantly, massively improved if we're going to really get where we need to go to set the conditions for the political election year of 2024. | ||
| This is about politics, not just accountability, and we need to let the American people Get the information and then make sure we have the communications efforts to get it out and penetrate through the controlled media that the Democrats control. | ||
| Colonel Harvey, how do people get to you? | ||
| What's the social media? What's the website? | ||
| I'm at Colonel D Harvey on Twitter, at Derek Harvey on Trump Social, and DerekHarvey.org. | ||
| is my website. | ||
| I want to make sure everybody goes there. | ||
| Colonel Harvey, thanks for taking time away today. | ||
| Join us. Thank you, sir. | ||
| Bye. I've got a cold open for Naomi Wolf that's going to blow your head up, so let's go ahead and play that and get Naomi in. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, you know, I think I can tell you where I was when the CNN feed came that it was 95 % effective on the vaccine. | |
| So many of us wanted to be hopeful. | ||
| So many of us wanted to say, okay, this is our ticket out, right? | ||
| Now we're done. So I think we had perhaps too little caution and too much optimism for some good things that came our way. | ||
| I really do. I think all of us wanted this to be done. | ||
| Nobody said waning when, you know, oh, this vaccine's gonna work. | ||
| Oh, well, maybe it'll wear off. | ||
| Nobody said, well, what if the next variant doesn't? | ||
| It's not as potent against the next variant. | ||
| The vaccine did not stop spread or infection. | ||
| I'm not saying it was completely bad, but it did not stop the spread or infection. | ||
| I think actually, if I could actually just correct that point, and that is initially it did. | ||
| For the Wuhan strain and for the alpha strain, all of the early data and the literature published in the New England Journal demonstrated that for those who worked, if you didn't get infected, that you were not transmitting it to other people. | ||
| And it had very high efficacy early on, up to 96%. | ||
| So it did change over time. | ||
| Okay, Dr. Naomi Wolf, am I seeing perjured testimony there? | ||
| What was that about? | ||
| You are seeing perjured testimony for sure. | ||
| She knows it. I mean, it's not an accident. | ||
| She claimed, I watched her presentation to Congress two days ago in its entirety, multiple times. | ||
| Well, she perjured herself in two distinct ways twice. | ||
| Once, as you saw, she asserted that early on in the rollout of the vaccine, it was 5 % effective. | ||
| And that study showed that it was 95 % effective. | ||
| And as you all recall, we all lived through this. | ||
| All the spokespeople all the way up to the White House were claiming again and again that it was 95 % effective initially in order to justify these mandates and these coercive measures and to get shots in arms. | ||
| Over time, they scaled it down 90 % effective, 80 % effective, waning efficacy time for a booster. | ||
| But she categorically stated, As late as April of 2021, that it was 95 % effective. | ||
| Well, she knew she was lying, and she knew in front of Congress that she was lying, because two things. | ||
| First of all, Report 74 of the War Room Daily, Pfizer Documents Analysis Volunteers, and she has these Pfizer documents. | ||
| The CDC has these documents that went to the FDA. She knows the conclusions. | ||
| They're government's conclusions that were the basis of government's actions. | ||
| And government talking points, she knows that, as Report 74 found, in order to reach that 95 % effective statement, what Pfizer did was they dropped 200 infected people who had been vaccinated from the study, leaving 8 infected vaccinated compared to 172 Unvaccinated infected people, they just got rid of them in order to make that claim. | ||
| So it was completely anomalous science that allowed them to make the claim of 95 % effective. | ||
| And the other thing she knows is, and this was before even the rollout, the other thing she knows is that by November of 2020, and the timeline, Steve, is very important because she's trying to escape her record by claiming that at that time she said it, that was the case and that is a lie. | ||
| She knew by November of 2020, and the FDA knew by November of 2020, within one month of rollout, that the vaccine Pfizer found was not effective to stop COVID or to stop transmission. | ||
| The conclusion of Pfizer, to remind your audience, is failure of efficacy and vaccine failure, including in stopping transmission. | ||
| And the number three side effect of the vaccine in the Pfizer documents is COVID. And that's starting in November of 2020 from the very first month of rollout. | ||
| So she knew well, she'd known for four months when she was still telling the American people that it was 95 % effective, that she was lying. | ||
| And she knew from the very beginning that when she was, again, the philosophical underpinning of the Illegal, unconstitutional mandates is, okay, you may be- Hang on, hang on, hang on. | ||
| I want to go back through this. | ||
| I'm going to be very precise because you're calling her a liar and that's just a liar. | ||
| You're saying she lied under oath, which is a crime. | ||
| It is. She says the Wuhan strand. | ||
| I want you to just go back and make the case. | ||
| We've got three minutes. Let's build the building blocks. | ||
| She says, oh, you're wrong, Comer. | ||
| For the Wuhan strand, it was actually the efficacy was 95%. | ||
| Walk back. That was back in the November 2020. | ||
| Walk us through why she's a liar one more time. | ||
| Okay, I'll do it using a timeline. | ||
| Our report, 74, shows that the trials, even before the rollout in November 2020, so leading up warp speed, leading up to the rollout of the Biden administration announcing, okay, everyone get in line, get your shots. | ||
| They got to that 95 % claim by dropping 200 vaccinated infected people from their study. | ||
| And leaving only enough people so that they could be able to claim falsely that there was a 95 % success rate. | ||
| This is completely anomalous science. | ||
| And this is in Report 74, Dr. | ||
| Chris Flowers, whom I interviewed about it, and his team. | ||
| They also ruined the study by vaccinating the control group after it was all over. | ||
| But that's another bizarre and unscientific story. | ||
| In addition to that, after it was rolled out, and that was November of 2020 and into the new administration, into her taking over as CDC director, already by November of 2020, already when President Biden took over and she became CDC director, she inherited the knowledge, the documentation that Pfizer had concluded that the vaccines did not stop infection or transmission. | ||
| Pfizer's conclusion at the end of 2020 that she inherited when she became CDC director was that there was failure of efficacy and vaccine failure and that the third most common side effect of the injection was COVID. So knowing both of these things, she lied first to the American people all the way into April and May of 2021, as you recall, claiming 95 % effective, claiming That it stopped transmission. | ||
| The President of the United States repeated these claims. | ||
| Dr. Fauci repeated these claims. | ||
| All the spokespeople in legacy media repeated these claims. | ||
| But Dr. Walensky, whose job it is to not lie, knew that this was a lie, and then she repeated both of these lies in front of the United States. | ||
| Okay. Pretty powerful. | ||
| Let me take a short commercial break. | ||
| Dr. Naomi Wolf, Jeff Clark. | ||
| Today, the 6 o'clock, we're kind of doing a special. | ||
| The war against the administrative state. | ||
| Maybe I should flip it. The administrative state's war on you. | ||
| That's what this is about. The administrative state's war on you. | ||
| Short commercial break. Dr. | ||
| Naomi Wolf, Jeffrey Clark, thanks. | ||
| Okay, welcome back. You heard, and look, it's not, we don't go looking for this. | ||
| We don't. But we've got to stop kidding ourselves because the hour is late and the time is urgent. | ||
| That's why I had three of the heaviest hitters I know. | ||
| Colonel Derek Harvey, literally a legend in the military, in the Army, in the Defense Department for what he did in Iraq and also what he did in the Trump administration and on the House Intel. | ||
| Naomi Wolf, who's so much incredible work she's done the last couple of years, and Jeff Clark. | ||
| Naomi, and this was about in the first segment you saw where Turner, the head of Intel, he's killing these investigations in Sequoia Capital because the arms of Wall Street and Silicon Valley not just go to the Democrats, but they also now are giving chump change to the Republicans, the way the Imperial Capital works. | ||
| One thing, and I think, I see what they're trying to do, and we've got Natalie working on it with, I see what they're trying to do with Biden, and there's money from Burisma and the CCP, and they're holding documents back, you gotta go to Treasury, but they won't give you the documents, you gotta go to a SCIF and read a 1023, but the FBI won't give it to you. | ||
| So they're fighting you every step of the way. | ||
| So I think Homer, in that regard, is making, probably not the type of way I would do it, I'd be much more hit him with a flamethrower. | ||
| One of the things I was disappointed, But I'm not an expert like you are. | ||
| In watching the testimony the other day, I didn't get the feeling that it was either the staff, it was the understanding of the members, it was the types of questions, but it looked a little bit kind of patty-cake. | ||
| The performative things you see in these hearings to make sure the folks back home feel, okay, there was a hearing, but the way the system works is just to check the box and move on. | ||
| Your thoughts, ma'am? I totally agree with you. | ||
| I was incredibly frustrated and disappointed. | ||
| I watched the entire hearing and I felt like I wish I could blame staffing. | ||
| I wish I could blame lack of preparation. | ||
| I have no idea why, you know, I know why the Democrats were, you know, showing a lot of good message discipline and sticking to their talking points of thank you, Dr. | ||
| Walensky, for saving us from the dark days of the pandemic. | ||
| They're doing their job. | ||
| Covering up a massive crime committed on their watch. | ||
| But I don't know, I can't explain why the Republicans, for the most part, except for Johnson and Representative Taylor Greene, were so gentle with Dr. | ||
| Walensky. And it did seem as if they didn't know the basic things that your audience knows because of the War Room Daily Clout visor documents analysis project. | ||
| That were wrong with this massive, I mean, they let her, they let Dr. | ||
| Walensky claim as an accomplishment 600 million shots in arms instead of as evidence of a massive attack on the American people. | ||
| They didn't challenge her about the 1,225 deaths in the documents. | ||
| They didn't challenge her about the tens of thousands of neurological conditions. | ||
| Only Marjorie Taylor Greene held up a V-A-R-S-E-V-A-E-R-S V-A-E-R-S report showing a spike, gross spike in miscarriages, and asked her to be accountable for that. | ||
| And we had yet another lie from Dr. | ||
| Walensky in response to that, claiming that V-A-R-S overreports, but Harvard and many other analyses shows that it underreports by 1 % to 10%. | ||
| So I felt like it was performative. | ||
| I felt like it was like, let's have the appearance of hauling her onto the carpet to answer questions, but the basic questions were not asked, and there was very little follow-up. | ||
| For example, you know, Marjorie Taylor Greene shows that there was a massive spike in miscarriages. | ||
| Dr. Walensky says, well, there's no evidence that that's the vaccine, and then she claims that CDC looks at every one of those reports, and no one asked, not anyone. | ||
| Well, Dr. | ||
| Walensky On your watch, there was a massive spike in miscarriages. | ||
| Why didn't you look for what was causing it? | ||
| You know, if you're claiming it's not the vaccine, why were you asleep at the wheel and not telling the American people that there's something causing a massive spike in miscarriages of American babies? | ||
| I mean, it was an extraordinarily soporific performance on the part of the Republicans, for the most part, I'm sorry to say. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Is that the case? | |
| Like we know at House Intel where Sequoia is putting this cash all around and funding with American pension money, the artificial intelligence apparatus of the Chinese military. | ||
| Is the reason that you see that the biomedical industry that you're hell-bent to take apart and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s hell-bent to take apart, have they just spread too much money around? | ||
| Are they impervious to assault through these types of hearings until we have a fundamental sea change? | ||
| Look, you know, as well as I do, that the big players fund both sides. | ||
| I mean, why would they not? | ||
| You know, and who are the big players? | ||
| It's not just pharma. It's Google. | ||
| You know, it's all the tech companies. | ||
| It's Facebook. They give money to both sides. | ||
| It's China, you know, through cutouts. | ||
| Money is flowing to both sides. | ||
| So you could really feel in that hearing that there was kind of guardrails on either side, you know, beyond which no one Ventured, except MTG to her credit. | ||
| So interesting, you know, back when I lived in Legacy Media, she was represented as the crazy person. | ||
| And in fact, she's like the only person who actually asked serious follow up questions. | ||
| But I do think we've got a serious problem unless we get completely new leadership in and new rules about funding these people, you know, getting getting money out of politics altogether. | ||
| It did seem as if everyone's hands were tied and That they didn't want to ask the questions that would lead them to, well, for instance, collaborating with Facebook. | ||
| I mean, at one point, Dr. | ||
| Walensky was asked, did you censor Facebook? | ||
| And that was an impressive moment. | ||
| I'm sorry, did you collude with big tech to censor Americans? | ||
| That was an impressive moment because it was a doctor asking and he was angry and she did. | ||
| And, you know, two Republican attorneys general have proven that she Along with the White House, along with Facebook and Twitter, censored me among other people and, you know, other critics of what was going on in a way that Mark Zuckerberg recently has conceded, you know, they censored people who are probably telling the truth. | ||
| That is correct. But she just was allowed to say, well, that's under litigation and leave it there. | ||
| Too bad it's under litigation. | ||
| You're in front of the United States Congress. | ||
| You know, you have to answer questions. | ||
| And I saw them treating her with kid gloves. | ||
| I want to get the, but I'm going to have to get you back on because I want to spend more time on the Guardian story, this massive story yesterday about the embryos. | ||
| Real quickly, updates on all your work, how can people assist, how can people help, and how they find more information? | ||
| Thank you. So there is big news that I'll be able to reveal soon, but I can't give the details. | ||
| Our lawsuit by George Smith against Pfizer and the White House and the CDC and the NIH, a bunch of defendants, has moved ahead. | ||
| with another landmark. | ||
| There are things going on that I'll reveal shortly, but there is progress. | ||
| And you can help us by, obviously, ordering the Pfizer book from Amazon and sending it to your state representative and your federal representative because these people either are clueless or pretending to be clueless. | ||
| So go to dailyclout.io and order it. | ||
| Go to Amazon and order it, War Room Daily Clout, Documents Analysis. | ||
| And yeah, support us at Daily Cloud because we're breaking these stories. | ||
| Other people aren't. | ||
| Before I go, big, big hug to Captain Bannon and to Natalie and you, because all of them and you were very calm a couple of days ago when the two young ladies were facing a bomb threat. | ||
| I was super impressed with how heroic and calm they were. | ||
| And you as a dad were also quite calm. | ||
| So I just want to hand it to the young ladies who are reporting. | ||
| I appreciate that when you hear that there's a bomb threat, particularly how volatile the situation is. | ||
| Yes, I was really proud of Natalie and Captain Bannon that did it with, you know, style. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Didn't panic. Never show your nervousness. | |
| But Naomi, thank you so much. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I really appreciate that. | |
| Naomi Wolf, Daily Cloud, at the tip of the spear of the Warriors. | ||
| Clark, Jeff Clark, you're the lead story in the New York Times this morning. | ||
| And I want to spend time, I got about 12 minutes here, I want to spend time on your theory of the case. | ||
| That's why I wanted to block that at the end. | ||
| Your theory of the case is paper you did over at the center that has official Washington in full meltdown. | ||
| Normally, they dismiss Jeff Clark. | ||
| He's being disbarred. He's a crazy man. | ||
| He's some environmental lawyer that was buried in the bowels of the Justice Department. | ||
| Well, they ain't laughing now. | ||
| He wrote a paper that literally can change the direction of how we take down the administrative state. | ||
| Can you walk us through this paper, what it means, and why the New York Times has made this the number one lead story today on Thursday? | ||
| Sure, Steve. What the paper does is it's an attempt to revivify the Constitution, or as I say in the paper, not just the Constitution in broad strokes, but the full 200 proof, you know, unadulterated, unwatered down Constitution. | ||
| And the New York Times calls that radical, but it's not radical. | ||
| It was our system of government until the Progressive Era when it came under assault by the likes of Professor Woodrow Wilson, who eventually became president. | ||
| It's amazing to read his writings, and I go through some of them in the paper, that he basically posits that there are three phases of constitutional or world government. | ||
| One is sort of the rule by And then administration suitable to rule by kings and autocrats. | ||
| Second is the rise of constitutions so that the people's rights are respected. | ||
| And then third, he says, finally, we can turn to the people exercising administration under the quote, new constitution. | ||
| So it's clear that these folks decided that we needed a new constitution. | ||
| The one that we actually saw ratified and that we lived under for a century wasn't good enough. | ||
| And beginning in the progressive era and then really reaching its zenith in the New Deal era under President Roosevelt, these folks came to power and they functionally rewrote the Constitution to empower the administrative state. | ||
| That's what Woodrow Wilson is saying. | ||
| He's saying, we don't need a world of the actual text of the Constitution. | ||
| What we need is a world where we now focus in this new and final phase on administration. | ||
| And in reality, administration is just a rebirth of rule by autocrats. | ||
| It's just that instead of a hereditary king, now we have a, maybe not hereditary, but sometimes you think they're even hereditary, but a closed group of people who are elites inside the deep state and the administrative state. | ||
| I differentiate between them because I think the deep state is the intelligence community. | ||
| It's Plato's Republic, the Guardians, right? | ||
| It's a meritocracy, and they come up with that. | ||
| It's Plato's Republic, not the American Republic. | ||
| Exactly. And Steve, that really comes in with this theorist that was important to the Roosevelt administration, who was the dean of the Harvard Law School, James Landis. | ||
| He wanted government by expert. | ||
| He became Roosevelt's head of the SEC, one of the independent agencies. | ||
| I think independent agencies are unconstitutional, Steve, because all executive power under the Constitution is vested in the President of the United States, one person. | ||
| Landis said, look, we just can't have a world without government by experts. | ||
| The biggest contrast on that, as much as I think In many ways he didn't go far enough, was always been this quip by William F. Buckley that he'd rather be ruled by a random group of people in the telephone book than by, you know, the Harvard faculty. | ||
| So it's exactly an attempt to put elites in place, a set of platonic guardians and It's totally contrary to our Constitution, and given how bad it's gotten, I think the framers have been long-rolling around in their graves, and it's time to restore that Constitution, I think, using a new Republican administration. | ||
| I've got a couple of minutes here. | ||
| How is this informing your work today at the Center? | ||
| Because this is what the New York Times focused on, was you and Russ, you're his wingman, but the Center is at the tip of the spear of some radical revolution about how the government's going to interact with the people. | ||
| How does this paper inform your actions today? | ||
| Sure. So, Steve, they don't want to see This administrative state dethroned and a president elected by the people, by the popular will, get back into control. | ||
| We have all these problems, like the president being prosecuted. | ||
| We have the whole issue of DOJ being weaponized against the American people, against traditional Catholics. | ||
| You know, trying to strike down state laws that recognize that children who aren't of age shouldn't be getting genital mutilation surgery. | ||
| All of these problems trace back at some level to the fact that we've created this independent cast, really, of experts, purported experts, really. | ||
| And you were just talking with Dr. | ||
| Naomi Wolf about how the purported experts totally led us astray In the COVID situation and with these vaccines. | ||
| And, you know, no, we don't want that. | ||
| People have an inherent common sense and their basic voting for the President of the United States, if that person is empowered and they're not tied down like Gulliver, that's what we need to solve a lot of these crises. | ||
| So that's how it informs our work, Steve. | ||
| Last thing, I've got about two minutes for this. | ||
| The days that you want to walk in, or Russ wants to walk in the Oval Office and say, and people say, well, you know, we've got to have justice focus. | ||
| They say, no, it's totally independent. | ||
| You can't even make a phone call over there. | ||
| That's also part to the heart of what this is. | ||
| This fantasy that the Justice Department is independent from the Chief Magistrate, which used to be called the Commander-in-Chief, that fantasy also is one you're trying to rip apart, correct? | ||
| Absolutely. I mean, Steve, the key clause there, or two clauses really, is that all executive power is vested in the President of the United States, all of it. | ||
| And then second, That the president's core duty is to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. | ||
| What is that, Steve? That's the power to enforce the laws. | ||
| That is law enforcement. Law enforcement cannot be independent of the president. | ||
| It is the president's signature power. | ||
| It is the core power that was given to him by the framers. | ||
| I've seen an annotated copy by Washington of the Constitution in an Article II in these particular parts in terms of the Take Care Clause. | ||
| President Washington wrote, required. | ||
| In other words, this was his mandatory duty to make sure that he insured this, and they've stripped it from him, and they tried to give it to this career bureaucracy, starting in 1870, really, part of the Progressive Era, to an unelected Justice Department, and it's wrong. | ||
| Jeff, it's obvious now why they're trying to put you in jail and disbar you because you're the tip of the tip of the spear. | ||
| Where do they go on social media and where do they go over at the Center to find out this report and all your work? | ||
| Sure. Well, thanks, Steve. | ||
| So we are at the Center for Renewing America, americarenewing.com. | ||
| I am JeffClarkUS on Getter and Twitter and RealJeffClark on Truth Social. | ||
| And one last note, Steve, if I could. | ||
| Watch for what's coming because the next thing we're going to take on is the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 and explaining why chunks of that are unconstitutional. | ||
| And that's how they control the money. | ||
| Wow. Wow. | ||
| Unbelievable. Clark, I can't wait. | ||
| I'm waiting with bated breath for that one. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Keep fighting, brother. Thank you. | |
| About to go to L.A. in a second, I want to talk about this protest. | ||
| Real quickly, we're going to have more on it tomorrow, but this whole situation, we had the briefing by Mills, Colonel Mills, on the envelopment by the CCP, particularly this electronic warfare base in Cuba. | ||
| It's about offensive cyber warfare against the United States of America, whether it's a grid, whether it's individuals. | ||
| Right now, it's very simple. | ||
| Just go to HometitleLock.com. | ||
| HometitleLock.com. | ||
| Go there right now. It's totally free. | ||
| You get a quick check to see if someone's been messing with your home title. | ||
| Under no circumstance with 90 % of your net worth tied up in your home, can you allow yourself to have somebody get in there, mess around with it, if not sell your house, take a second mortgage of a couple hundred thousand bucks, take the cash, leave you with the payments in the new high interest charges. | ||
| If that happens, you will be financially crippled and your ability to retire is going to be financially crippled. | ||
| It cannot happen. It's simple. | ||
| It's simple to go check this. | ||
| Okay? So it's not title insurance. | ||
| This is about the cyber threats to you. | ||
| Go to hometitlelock.com right now and check it out. | ||
| Do it right now. John Yelp, tell me about this. | ||
| I just want to know, I want people, it's the night before, the day before, we'll have you on tomorrow to talk more about the content. | ||
| I just need people to know what site to go to, where are they supposed to rally, what are you doing, why is this important, and where do people go to participate? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Tomorrow's going to be history. | |
| It's one of the largest, fastest put-together prayer moments. | ||
| In response to an attack on one major religion in America tomorrow, LA Dodger Stadium. | ||
| It starts at 3pm. | ||
| There'll be plenty of parking down there. | ||
| LAPD will be all over protecting us. | ||
| It's a moment to stand up. | ||
| To the blasphemy that the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence are doing upon Christians all over this country. | ||
| When you hump our Lord and mock Him on the cross like two men naked doing that, you cannot sit back. | ||
| It's going to be special. | ||
| The light will shine out of the darkness tomorrow. | ||
| Go to C4C.com, the letter C, F-O-R-C.com for the latest updates on parking, etc. | ||
| Okay, one more time. | ||
| This is, by the way, this group desecrates and mocks Christianity, so all members, by the way, Muslims, Jewish rabbis, anybody, welcome to participate, and there is going to be participation. | ||
| This is mocking all religions, but very specifically, they single out our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and also women religious. | ||
| It is a profanity, a depravity, and a desecration, and we're not going to tolerate it. | ||
| There's no, they say, let's dialogue, no, nothing to talk about here. | ||
| No dialogue. Not interested. | ||
| Interested in this march and action. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Where do they go, John? They go to the letter C, F-O-R-C dot com. | |
| Thousands are coming. Be part of history tomorrow. | ||
| Or you can follow us on Twitter as well. | ||
| C-F-O-R-C is our handle on Twitter. | ||
| Amazing work you've done, sir. | ||
| Very honored to have you on here. | ||
| Good luck tomorrow. All right. | ||
| God bless. We'll have John back on the morning show. | ||
| Okay, a little intense 6 o'clock show, but it shows you. | ||
| It's the war against the administrative state. | ||
| If you want to take your country back, they're not just going to sit there and pat you on the head and toss the keys and say, what a wonderful idea. | ||
| President Trump gets more votes, maybe it's your turn to run the country. | ||
| That is not how it works. | ||
| Hate to be the bearer of reality check, but that's reality check. | ||
| But you got some pretty tough hombres That are on the front line in Manning the Ramparts. | ||
| Back here tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. | ||
| We'll go through it. I think we're going to do some capital markets, some economics tomorrow. | ||
| Be here. The War Room. |
Export Selection