All Episodes
July 7, 2023 - Bannon's War Room
47:58
Battleground EP 328: RFK Jr Turns Back On Mom's For Liberty; China To Default Trillions Of Debt
Participants
Main voices
d
dr harvey risch
08:27
s
steve bannon
07:45
Appearances
t
tiffany justice
04:52
Clips
s
stephen moore
00:20
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
steve bannon
This is what you're fighting for.
I mean, every day you're out there.
What they're doing is blowing people off.
If you continue to look the other way and shut up, then the oppressors, the authoritarians, get total control and total power.
Because this is just like in Arizona.
This is just like in Georgia.
It's another element that backs them into a quarter and shows their lies and misrepresentations.
This is why this audience is going to have to get engaged.
As we've told you, this is the fight.
unidentified
All this nonsense, all this spin, they can't handle the truth.
War Room. Battleground.
steve bannon
Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon.
It's Friday, 7 July, Year of Our Lord, 2023.
We're absolutely packed at 6 o'clock.
I want to thank Peter Navarro for taking over the five.
As Dr. Navarro talked about, a guy named Peter Norton.
I want to start with Dr. Harvey Risch from Yale.
Peter Norton, Lancet, this piece you had up, taken down.
Dr. Risch, explain to me what's going on.
And first off, could you, Peter Norton, pretty controversial guy running Lancet.
Walk through what happened in all of this, because it's a very controversial piece.
And people don't know why it's been taken down and where is it?
dr harvey risch
So this was a study that I and my colleagues did in reviewing papers that had been published on case series of deaths after COVID vaccination.
And it was a compilation of 44 studies that were extensively searched to find.
It was reported in a preprint server called SSRN. Now SSRN is affiliated with Lancet because the Lancet It puts papers there when it considers them for review, although this paper had not been submitted to Lancet for review.
Nevertheless, it was submitted to the SSRN website.
It was there.
It was getting a lot of attention, apparently some hundreds of downloads per minute after people started recognizing it, until within about 24 hours, it looks like the publisher took down It removed the paper from the website.
And the publisher, Elsevier, is the same publisher for SSRN and for Lancet, and so all of this is making a confusing statement about the Lancet nature of this paper.
It was, in fact, a preprint, not a published paper that was removed.
Nevertheless, it's a valid paper, and it's a completely transparent paper.
One can look at the individual subjects that were evaluated, In the appendix of this paper.
So what the gist of the paper was is to look at people who've died within a short time frame after COVID vaccination, and this was done by individual authors across the world who provided published case reports of these deaths.
Sometimes there were case series.
In one country there was, I think, a series of 121 and another a series of 30.
So this was done by looking at a Medline, which is a database search of published papers, and then following up in their references to look for other published papers.
And I think we all looked through about 700 papers and narrowed it down to 44 that actually provided information about the medical circumstances of the deaths of close to, I think, 400 people who had died within some timeframe, a few weeks. After COVID vaccination, the great majority died within three days or four days after COVID vaccination, and what their autopsies showed.
So this was an analysis of the autopsies of all of these individual patients.
And as I said, the clinicians in our group, Drs.
Mackis, Hodkinson, and McCullough, independently, separately, reviewed all of the clinical material provided by the authors of the original papers.
To draw conclusions about the likelihood that the deaths were vaccine-related or not, all of the information that they used was extracted from the original papers and put into an appendix table for each patient, and so doctors or anyone else who think that they would like to review and decide for themselves whether these cases were vaccine-related or not can go to where the paper is,
which is on the Zenodo website, which is another preprint server, And download the paper, download the appendix, look through all the patients, decide based on the technical information about the autopsy findings in each of the patients, whether they think they were vaccine-related or not, and draw one's own conclusions.
steve bannon
It's about drawing this one's own conclusion.
You know, we have Tiffany Justice is going to join us in a few minutes, one of the leaders of Moms for Liberty.
Part of the reason that whole group exists is parental rights was because, well, the whole reason it started was the pandemic and the shutdowns and parents walking by and seeing on the computer what their, you know, the Zoom calls and what their kids were essentially not learning.
But obviously a big part of this was the masking and the shutdowns and lockdowns and the vaccines.
We're not going to get back to the America that we love until we have a full and frank discussion with all the scientific evidence of this.
I think what people are concerned, like myself and others that are not scientists, is that you have renowned publications like Lancet, one of the top publications in the world, and these very primitive doctors go forth with something with this kind of evidence, and as soon as this puts up, It's taken down.
Are we still in a situation of massive censorship about having an adult conversation based upon science, based upon facts about exactly the entire pandemic and particularly things like the vaccines?
dr harvey risch
Yes, and I'm laughing because Lancet, if you'll remember, was one of the two journals that published the fake Surgesphere papers that supposedly went through real peer review.
And got published and were up for two weeks before Lancet was forced to have the authors retract that paper because it was based on fraudulent data in the first place.
And so a journal that's credulous when it comes to government-approved messaging and slams the door on independent scientific results that are consistent with what we know now about all or many of the untoward adverse The biochemical and biological mechanisms that these vaccines do, you know, that is forbidden to be published in anything related to the publisher.
Now, I would ask, I'm not sure whether Elsevier, the publisher, is engaged in the Trusted News Initiative as so many publishers and media around the world are today.
steve bannon
Given, from what you extrapolate from what was found, which you guys found in the research on the autopsies, what further research would you call for right now that you think has to be done so that we can have a more, what, fulsome conversation about this?
Where do you see what Ewan McCulloch and others did, where do you see it, where would you like to see it go with more basic research in this?
dr harvey risch
The science has to be open.
The science has to be publishable.
That we have now submitted this paper to, I think, five journals who've all rejected it, and we're going to keep submitting until it gets to a journal that will review it.
The journals won't even send it out for peer review.
So, obviously, there is a cabal, so to speak, of medical publishing that is controlled by non-academic, non-scientific interests that are preventing discussion of Things medical, things scientific, about most aspects related to the pandemic and, you know, treatment, vaccination, non-pharmaceutical interventions that didn't work, and so on.
That makes this an objective conversation.
Until we have an objective conversation and not smearing that every time, you know, any one of these papers or voices says there's this stuff going on and they're all labeled, smeared with conspiracy theorists, You know, it's suppressed, and still we have an open and objective interaction conversation where the other side is not just calling names and conspiring to censor, but actually comes out and says, well, here's our data, and here's why we believe what we believe.
Until that happens, we're not getting any adequate, satisfying way of understanding what went on and trust that the people Who did this to us, to the country, to the scientific establishment, we have no trust that they're doing anything objective and only using the tools of what we call scientism, of making things look like they're scientific when they're not, and not actually dealing with scientific questions.
So we have no trust in all these agencies of government and the government itself.
steve bannon
In your long career at Yale, have you ever seen a situation where a paper of this kind of gravitas, they wouldn't even send it out for peer review?
dr harvey risch
Well, it happens not infrequently.
There's a lot of politics involved in sending out papers.
If you are a new investigator in a field that you haven't published before, you know, you're going to get a lot more rejections just because you're not part of the club, so to speak.
And that's why junior investigators frequently have senior co-authors who establish their credibility and help them to get things published.
You know, there's a certain degree that scientists in their own fields are trusted because of their reputations, because of what they've published, what they've said at meetings, the quality of their work, and so on.
And that's inherent.
You can't completely read a scientific paper and know that everything was fair and uncorrupted and up and up without knowing the individuals and how they work.
And this is gained by reputation over time.
And that's just part of the system and there's no way around that.
But, you know, I think what we've learned is that there was a lot more corruption going on even before COVID that we didn't really know about, although the editors, Horton of Lancet and Dr.
Angel of New England Journal, have all been You know, talking about this for decades now of the pharma control of what gets published in their journals, if not elsewhere.
steve bannon
Peter Horton, remember the name.
Dr. Risch, thank you for taking time to join us.
How do people track you down on your social media?
dr harvey risch
A pleasure. So I now have a Twitter handle, Dr.
Harvey Risch. I think I have four followers or something because it's brand new.
It's this week. Dr.
Harvey Risch. Telegram, I'm Harvey Risch, MD, PhD.
And of course, you can find me on my Yale page.
Just Google Yale and Risch, R-I-S-C-H, and you can find me there.
And there's links to the other stuff also.
And I also say that I'm on the wellness company, which, you know, I'm happy to point out that you can find me there at twc.health.
steve bannon
They're fantastic. We love those guys, Dr.
McCullough and you. We want to make sure we will get you a lot of people over at Twitter, and we want to make sure we get you up on Getter, too.
Dr. Risch, thank you so much.
Honored to have you on here, sir, as always.
dr harvey risch
Pleasure to be with you again. Thanks.
steve bannon
Thank you, sir. Let's go. I get Steve Moore.
I want to play this spot from Steve Moore and have Steve Moore come in.
unidentified
And I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever.
In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace stood in the schoolhouse door to keep black children out of the best schools.
In 2023, a new generation of George Wallace Democrats is again blocking schoolhouse doors, opposing popular school choice programs in states like New York, Arizona, Illinois, Nevada, North Carolina and Texas, Democrats are fighting programs that give black and Hispanic parents the ability to send their kids to the best possible schools.
Yet many of these same politicians send their own kids to private schools.
It's time for every child in America to finally have equal access to good schools.
steve bannon
Okay, Steve Moore. Tiffany Justice is going to join us here in a minute.
And, you know, Tiffany has built one of the great organizations, Moms for Liberty, and they're all over these type of issues.
And we have Tiffany on every couple of days or at least once or twice a week to talk about issues like this.
We always have Steve Moore on, like today, when the labor statistics come out and capital markets, why—and this is a very powerful ad— Why, as one of Trump's leading economists and understanding the Trump movement and MAGA and the economics of this, why is Steve Moore involved himself in this spot, sir? Steve, great to be with you.
unidentified
I think that two things.
One is educational choice and school choice is one of the most important economic issues for our country.
We cannot have kids.
You've got hundreds of public schools around the country where The kids can't barely read or barely do math.
And that's not an indictment of the children.
It's an indictment of the public schools that are not teaching our kids.
Now, there are great public schools out there.
I was lucky I got to go to a great public school.
The victims of the education bureaucracy, of course, are Hispanic kids.
Black kids and low-income kids.
And so I would make the case to you, we cannot be the most competitive country in the world.
We cannot be the richest country in the world if we're graduating from kids from school that can't even read the diploma, for goodness sake.
And that's how bad it has gotten.
And I'd make another point, Steve.
We just had that case that came down about racial preferences in terms of college admissions.
stephen moore
But the real civil rights issue of our time, and I wonder if you agree with this, Steve, is letting poor black kids and poor white kids and Indian kids and poor Hispanic kids who are stuck in these miserable, failing public schools, let their parents have an option of where they send their kids to school.
unidentified
Let them go to charters. Let them go to Catholic schools.
Let them go to Montessori schools or Jewish schools or art schools.
Whatever will teach them Because these kids, we cannot go on with this kind of education system.
It is child abuse.
steve bannon
And you make the direct connection, not just with the civil rights and child abuse, but this has a direct impact on our economy, that our workforce, and we're just talking a couple of years down range, is not going to be competitive.
It is already not competitive.
And so that adds additional costs.
You're going to add additional automation.
You're going to end jobs. You're saying if you don't start taking care of this today, you're just asking for a massive economic problem in the future?
unidentified
Absolutely. I mean, look at China.
They have hundreds of thousands of programmers and, you know, you talk to the technology companies, I've talked to the CEOs, I'm saying, why are you offshoring all of this work to countries like China and India?
And they say, because we don't have, our kids here aren't capable of doing that.
Now, it's not that they don't have the aptitude to do it, they just are not being taught anything in schools.
I mean, Steve Bannon, I've been to some of these inner-city schools That are, you know, heavily minority.
And no white parent would ever send those kids to those schools.
It brings tears to your eyes to see the mayhem and the violence and the lack of good teachers in these schools.
We have—now, there's a good news part of this story, Steve.
This year, we've seen 12 states, almost all red states, with Republican governors, really expanding school choice.
And that's a fantastic development.
But guess what? In the blue states, run by Democrats, they say how much they care about minorities.
They won't let these kids out of these failing schools.
And this just happened, Steve.
I don't know if you've been following this story, but Shapiro, the governor of Pennsylvania, he campaigned for governor on school choice.
And then the teachers union said, no, you can't back this.
You can't sign this bill.
And so he vetoed the bill, Steve, a bill that he campaigned on this.
But he cares more about teachers' unions than he does about kids.
steve bannon
What's the call to action, Steve?
Where do people go? I know you've got solutions, but where do people go to get more information?
What do you want this audience to do?
unidentified
First of all, people should be speaking out.
The entire conservative and free market movement should be talking about the importance.
Isn't it ironic that we are the ones who are the ones who want You know, black kids and Hispanic kids and people with, you know, low-income backgrounds to get the best possible education.
And it's the left that won't allow that to happen.
I mean, that's stunning to me.
And then they have, they accuse us of being racist, Steve.
That's why we're on this ad.
Who are the racists here, Steve?
steve bannon
Really? Steve, where do people go to your site?
Where do they go to your social media to follow you?
You're right, this is a huge issue, a huge civil rights issue of our time, but it's also a massive economic issue.
unidentified
Yeah, Committee to Unleash Prosperity, and show it to your friends, download it.
We want every American to see this, because we need a sense of outrage that the Democrats, and by the way, it starts from the very top, Steve.
It stops with It starts with Joe Biden, Kamala, and so many of these Democrats.
They sent their own kids to private schools, but they won't let these low-income kids go to private schools.
It was really an outrage.
So we want everybody to get really involved in this.
This is the school choice moment, and it is critical to our economic future as a country if we're going to compete with China.
steve bannon
Steve Moore, we'll push it out hard.
Thank you for making the spot.
Thank you for coming on. So glad to have you on here, not talking about capital markets for a change.
unidentified
Education for our people.
steve bannon
EJ was on this morning.
He's fantastic. Your group over there is fantastic.
I got a clip, but I want to hold the clip.
I want to get Tiffany in here.
So Tiffany, here's why.
The first two guests we had today are on different topics, but they really get to the core Of what you tapped into and Tina tapped into, this parents' rights movement.
Because now you had this massive convention, wall-to-wall coverage, huge riots outside, everything.
Stories covered by all media.
Of course, the liberal media is saying, you're a white supremacist group, you're a group of Nazis, you're anti-gay, everything.
I'm going to get in that a second. Tie together Harvey Risch and Steve Moore and why that is really the impetus in this parental rights movement, ma'am.
tiffany justice
Parents have the fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their children in America.
That's a right the government doesn't give you and they can't easily take away.
So you're talking about parents making informed decisions, right?
We deserve the truth. If you're making decisions for your children's health care, you deserve honest information.
Why are there so many people that want to keep honest information from parents?
Why would anyone want a parent to be making a decision and be ill-informed in that process?
As far as school choice is concerned, we believe in education freedom.
Every parent has the fundamental right to direct the education of their child.
The fact that we have children that are trapped in failing schools and the teachers unions and the federal government are totally ignoring this is criminal.
Every year that a child is either locked out of school or not being given the tools and knowledge they need in order to be successful in life is a stolen year.
And parents are crying out, so you better believe that Moms for Liberty is coming into the cities.
We were in Philadelphia for the summit, and you can expect a lot more activity and action in major cities across the country because these parents have had enough, and we need to unify, educate, and empower them to have their voices heard.
Nobody's going to fight for anything like mom or dad is going to fight for their kids.
steve bannon
I remember the first time I talked to you, you said, hey, parents want their children to have a good, fulfilling life, and part of those have a good job or a career, and they understand these schools.
And you said, this is a major economic issue that nobody's talking about.
Give me some thoughts on that.
tiffany justice
Yeah, I think it's the biggest national security crisis that we have in the United States of America.
We can engage in all of these different areas, but the fact that we have two-thirds of American children not learning to read in our public schools, and we're spending $800 billion a year this year on public education, it's just criminal.
Enough. It's fraud. We have kids that are going to school for 8 hours, 10 hours a day, and they're not learning anything other than to be a social justice warrior.
If we really want to help children and we want to talk about equity and we want to talk about kindness and inclusivity, teach the kids how to read.
That's not happening and there's no good reason for it.
steve bannon
Okay. I was real excited that you invited Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
to come because I thought that's a broadening out and a very smart thing.
I was really excited about that.
And I was supposed to go.
I couldn't make it. Mo went.
The feedback we got from everybody was amazing.
Talked to the president afterwards. Amazing.
Just incredible conference summit.
People loved it. Before I play the clip, how long is the clip before I play it?
Is it? Yeah, I want to ask you first.
What's the controversy about Robert F. Kennedy?
I, quite frankly, I was so busy doing stuff for the Worm, I didn't quite catch that he didn't go and speak.
And I understand News Nation.
He invited us as a speaker, and why didn't he show up?
tiffany justice
I thought it was really important to have him come as a speaker.
A lot of our moms have been involved and curious about medical freedom.
If they weren't involved before, certainly when COVID happened and there were looming concerns about forced COVID vaccines for children, which many moms and dads across the country knew and saw were completely unnecessary.
You know, Robert Kennedy, Children's Health Defense, was a place that they went for information.
And so, you know, when we want to bring speakers to our moms and talk about important issues, this isn't a partisan issue, this idea of parental rights.
And so it was obvious to us, of course, we invited President Biden.
We received no response from the White House, but we invited Robert Kennedy and worked to get to him in a couple different ways and finally did.
Called me on my cell phone at night in my home and we had a good conversation and I think there were votes in the room for him at the summit and he unfortunately decided that he wouldn't be able to attend and we were told originally it was because of family commitments and then you're going to play this News Nation clip and you know I was fine to respect the fact that he didn't want to come or perhaps he had family obligations But you just need to know if you're going to throw our moms under the bus,
if you're going to throw our organization under the bus, if you're going to lie about us, then we're going to tell the truth.
And so we try to do that as honestly as possible.
And that News Nation clip was just incredibly disappointing.
And I can share a little bit more about it after we watch it.
steve bannon
Yeah, I'm going to play it in a second, but I just want to go back.
In fact, I'll take us a break and we'll play it when we get back from break.
And I've also got Andrew Hale from Heritage on a topic close to our heart.
You'll be familiar with this when we get Brother Hale on here.
You're not a political organization.
You invited Biden.
You would love this Secretary of Education.
The purpose of this is to get parents involved in decisions around their children's education.
Is that basically the tagline for Moms for Liberty?
tiffany justice
Yeah, absolutely. I mean, the government shouldn't be making these decisions for our children.
The idea that we have this indoctrination happening in schools, that our kids are being turned into social justice warriors and not being taught to read, enough.
We've had enough with it.
And so we continue to say the issue of parental rights.
The issue of children being given a proper and thorough education, these are not partisan issues, and we continue to try to bring people together.
Unfortunately, it seems like there are a lot of people that want us to continue to stay divided on this issue.
Again, it was a missed opportunity for RFK. I think there were votes in the room for him.
And, you know, Steve, I had a mom share with me.
steve bannon
Not just votes. I think he could have conversed.
People that maybe weren't votes could have said, hey, I'm open to listen to this guy more.
I think the power. I was so excited about him coming because people know that I think his message people have to start paying attention to.
He has many policies that I think are quite radical and don't agree with.
But he's talking about a couple of core issues that people have to be able to.
Just one thing. And this is not your opinion about the failure.
Give me some of the stats you normally quote about the failure of the education.
What Steve Moore was talking about, about the civil rights movement in our time is what's happening to these children.
Just give us a couple of stats before we go to break.
tiffany justice
Yeah, I mean, the NAEP scores that we just saw showed that we have the lowest reading and math scores that we've had in over 40 years, but the spending that we've seen happen across the country has just been growing and growing and growing.
14% of black children across the United States of America are reading at or above grade level.
That's horrible. Every parent should be outraged about those numbers.
And we have a system that seems to be very intent on making sure that it does what adults want and need, right?
We saw the influence of the teachers' unions on our children's education during COVID, keeping schools locked down, very cozy with the CDC and the Biden administration, and parents' voices were shut down.
At school board meetings all over the country.
And so we're just not going to stand for that anymore.
Our voices will be heard.
These are our children, not Joe Biden's.
And we are going to fight to make sure that they get what they need out of American public schools.
steve bannon
Tiffany Jess is going to come back after the break.
I'm going to start with this clip from News Nation when we return.
And Andrew Hale with an explosive piece in The Hill that you're going to want to know about.
unidentified
Next. Welcome back.
We have a variety of topics we want to get to and a variety of questions in our last few minutes from our audience.
We're going to start with James from Charleston.
He's the CEO of a social media consulting firm who has a question about the LGBTQ vote.
James. Thank you very much, Elizabeth.
Mr. Kennedy, I have a question.
You recently agreed and then withdrew that agreement to speak before a group named the Moms for Liberty.
They are a right-wing group that would like to tell other parents how to do their own children, but you agreed to do that.
You have mentioned your uncle and your father, but you've not mentioned Ted Kennedy, who I've worked with the United States Senate for six years and his staff on these issues.
There was no bigger champion or stalwart for LGBTQ equality than Ted Kennedy, the late Ted Kennedy, and you know that.
Explain to me why, as a Democratic voter, I should ever support you in a primary against any other Democrat when you agree to speak before a group that wants to ban my marriage and tell other parents how to treat their children.
I didn't speak in front of that group.
And when somebody on my staff accepted that invitation, I was unaware of it.
I need to interrupt you for one second.
As a former congressional staffer, if somebody who's elected blame staff, that's the wrong answer.
You have to take responsibility for agreeing to speak before those groups.
You know, I'm at the beginning of a campaign.
I have no, you know, long-term staff.
We weren't allowed to even raise money until April 5th.
So I'm scaling a campaign very, very quickly, and I accept a lot of invitations without the capacity to look into.
And I know Teddy had, you know, 86 members on his staff.
But when a member of my staff, through no fault of her own, accepted that, and when I found out that that was their position, I declined to go.
There will be nobody in the Oval Office who is more supportive of LGBTQ rights than I am.
I was with Teddy campaigning at the Castro in 1980.
It was the first political presidential campaign that ever courted the gay vote.
It's very important to me.
It's a civil rights. As important as the civil rights to any other group, and their civil rights my family has stood for, has fought for, and I will do the same.
I made a mistake by accepting that invitation, and when I found out those positions, I did not show up.
Would you denounce what they stand for?
That's my question. Excuse me?
Would you denounce what they stand for, Moms for Liberty, is James' question.
You know, I'm not going to issue a denunciation.
I'm telling you right now, I don't agree with anybody who says that we shouldn't respect gay rights.
You know, or anybody else's rights.
If you're an American, You have those rights, and everybody should respect them, and, you know, I'm going to do everything I can to make sure that they're— I've got to jump in here.
Okay. First off, and I've been very complimentary, that's the best town hall that's been done in this entire process, and Vargas should get a hat tip because News Nation is kind of a startup news operation, relatively young.
I thought it was fantastic. I didn't watch all the Q&A. Tiffany Justice, correct me if I'm wrong.
I don't even remember anything.
Are you an anti-LGBTQ gay marriage organization?
I thought you had gay people on your board of all these groups around the country, these local chapters.
Yeah, nothing about this interview was good.
I have to be honest with you, or his answer.
We have gay chapter chairs.
We have members who have gay children.
We have a member of our outreach team who is a lesbian.
So just the idea that somehow that was our position is untrue, and all he would have had to do, all Bobby would have had to do, was call me again on the cell phone number that he had that he called me once before and ask our position, and I would have been able to clarify that for him.
Nothing about this makes me happy.
We need strong leaders in America.
And at a time in our country where parents are looking for someone to stand up for the truth and to have our backs, it was really disappointing to see Mr.
Kennedy fold in this way.
I had a mom pass me a message who had been a big supporter of Bobby Kennedy's throughout his time with Children's Health Defense and had been very anxious to hear him speak.
And she said that what he did to Moms for Liberty is exactly what the medical establishment has done to moms with children who have vaccine injuries.
So this was really disappointing, and it made us sad.
But the truth of the matter is, Steve, better to know now than to know in the middle of another pandemic or another time that tests the leaders of this nation, because we need strong people that are going to stand for the truth and that are going to be bold and courageous in their leadership.
Let me just ask you one question.
When that was played live, had he already called and canceled?
Did you know anything about this when you were hearing that?
Here's the response. What communications had you already had with your staff or had you had any?
Yeah, I mean, as I said, you know, I spoke with him personally as well as his campaign manager several times, and we had worked with his staff to arrange for him to speak with bios and photos shared and press releases that had been approved.
So, you know, his team decided to, again, pull out.
And, you know, Steve, again, it brings me no, there's no joy in this.
We would have allowed this to continue and just said he had family obligations.
But to To speak and lie about the organization in that manner, or to somehow – I'm a woman – to throw a female staffer under the bus and say that it was someone else's fault, I just think, was unfair.
And we want to be honest, and we will work with any presidential campaign to be able to give access to our membership for information.
But I will stand up for these moms and dads, and I will stand up for Moms for Liberty, because parents coming together on the issue of parental rights, I think, is the best hope for the future of America.
Last question for all the protesters, and there was a lot of protesters, maybe some say some mini riot outside to turn up the Bible.
I mean, it was out of control.
What would you have to say to them?
I wish they had come in and really met the moms and learned about what we were sharing.
We were equipping moms and dads with information and tools in order to be more effective advocates.
They were outside yelling at a building.
Nothing good comes from that.
We had an egg thrown at a 16-year-old in her face and injured her.
You know, moms and dads were harassed every time they walked outside of the building.
Children were yelled at and called names.
So, you know, just sad for Philadelphia.
I just want to give a shout out, Steve, if I can, to the Philly PD and the Marriott.
They were amazing.
You know, I think the Marriott wasn't sure what to expect, and there had been so much vitriol shared that we had state senators and representatives and Pennsylvania Democrats who were trying to get us blocked from the American Museum of the Revolution and the Marriott.
And, in fact, the museum was vandalized the night before our event there, which was just completely devastating to us.
We're very sad to see that.
But we're proud of the fact that everyone stood with us, and we were able to show how wonderful our membership is, and I'm really proud to say that at the end of the event, when the summit was all over and we walked out of the conference room.
into the lobby, Marriott staff was lined up and was clapping for us, and we just felt very proud of the fact that our organization kind of, you know, who we really are, was able to shine through all of the other noise from outside.
Tiffany, how do people find out more about Moms for Liberty and your social media?
Yeah, go to momsforliberty.org.
If you don't have a chapter near you, please click to start one.
You know, we need to stand up to a lot of this nonsense.
And we're having a lot of fun at Moms for Liberty, and we're working to save our country at the same time.
So momsforliberty.org.
You can follow us at Twitter, on Facebook, on Rumble, on Getter.
We're on lots of different platforms, and we'd love to hear from you.
By the way, the summit was a Grand Slam home run, and just keep at it.
Thank you, sir. You can go to our website to see all of the different videos in our YouTube channel.
We live streamed the entire event.
Nothing to hide here. So go and check us out.
Thanks, Tiffany. Good work.
I've been waiting for this guy for a long time.
For long-time viewers of the show, particularly in the early days when we shifted from war room impeachment to war room pandemic back on, I think, 20 January 2020, we were obviously ahead by three, four, five months the mainstream media shifted to the pandemic.
One of the things we would talk about Given, you know, I'm fully sanctioned by the Chinese Communist Party, given my time with President Trump and others of defending Lao Beijing and saying the CCP is a criminal organization.
We kept talking about this issue about these Chinese bonds owned by American citizens.
I want to give a headline to a piece in The Hill.
China is in default on a trillion dollars in debt to U.S. bondholders.
Will the U.S. force repayment?
Andrew Hale joins us, the author of that piece.
Andrew, we used to have Joanna Bianco and the other people on.
They did a great job of describing this and talking about this in the early days of the pandemic, but nobody's done as good a job of you of laying this out.
Walk us through what we talk about when you say that the CCP has essentially stiffed American bondholders of over a trillion dollars.
Well, everyone, Steve, should pay their sovereign debt.
And under successor government doctrine, you know, if you look, for example, even an example of Germany, you had the Second Reich during World War I. They lost.
Reparations were owed. And then, of course, you had the Weimar Republic.
And then after that, you had the Third Reich.
And then you had the two Germans, East and West.
After the Second World War, and it was just only in 2010 that the government of the Federal Republic of Germany paid off that World War I debt.
Now, the only government in those intermediate years that did actually default was, of course, famously Adolf Hitler's Nazi Third Reich.
So again, there are examples of defaulting, but they generally do get paid.
In the case of China, the imperial government, the Qing Dynasty, which the Chinese emperor abdicated in 1911, and subsequently the Republic of China government, which lasted until 1949, they took out gold-denominated bonds.
Which then were used to pay for infrastructure, roads, bridges, railways, which they still have and still benefit from.
And now when the Republic of China government lost the Civil War in 1949, the People's Republic of China repudiated that debt.
Now, at the time, it was a pure communist regime.
Something similar had happened in Russia when, of course, the Tsar failed, and the Bolsheviks took over, and the Bolsheviks did not want to engage in Western capitalism, and so they defaulted as well.
The People's Republic of China has never, they are now in our capital markets, they have an A rating from the three main credit rating agencies, and they've never ever owed up to this debt and paid it.
But they have actually paid other countries.
For example, In the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher drove a very hard bargain over the return of Hong Kong.
The United Kingdom owned Hong Kong Island and Kowloon Plinsa outright under treaty, the Treaty of Nanking, and those places were virtually uninhabited when the British arrived.
It was because they actually, in 1897, they leased a 100-year lease of new territories on the mainland to be returned in 1997.
Margaret Thatcher said, you can have the new territories back, but you can't have Hong Kong Island and the new territories.
And China said, well, we can just turn off the water.
And so she said, fine.
But she also played her hand as well.
Very tough. She was the Iron Lady.
And of course, she said, you will not have access to UK capital markets.
Unless you honor this debt and pay British bondholders, and they did in the 1980s.
Now, so China has selectively defaulted, and the United States has never held China to account on this issue in the past decade since 1949.
And since giving the most favored nation status since the 1970s, business has been very good with China.
There was a naive belief In the West, that if we embrace them, have lots of trade and business with them, that they'll embrace our Western norms of international human rights law, they'll embrace our values.
Sadly, that was naivete.
That has not happened. They have forced labor, slave labor, we should say, in their supply chains.
They have a genocide on the Uyghurs and the Tibetans and others, and they have a horrific human rights record.
But again, many choose to ignore that because getting rich is more important to other interests, particularly Wall Street.
So we have that situation where they've been selectively allowed to pay the United Kingdom bondholders, the British bondholders, but they've been allowed by the U.S. government to default.
But hang on, Andrew, for a second.
And by the way, can we put the split screen up?
I don't need to see me. I want to see the article next to Andrew.
Andrew, you talk about that Thatcher had this pressure point or leverage point and got the UK bondholders paid off.
We've had a number of them, Tiananmen Square, others.
Why has the US government since 1949, I would actually argue, As McCarthy argued that the State Department and the Defense Department at the time and General Marshall and others essentially let Mao and these other criminals take the country back in 1949.
We've had a number of inflection points, a number of pressure points.
Why has the U.S. government never stopped in here and said, oh, by the way, for us to get you past Tiananmen, you've got to pay off the bondholders.
We've had just as many opportunities as Margaret Thatcher.
Why has the U.S. government never done it?
Well, again, there's been a lot of support in Congress in the decades since 1949 with very positive resolutions, and they've had a number of joint letters, bipartisan efforts from Congress.
But as soon as they go up to the administration, as soon as they go up to the White House, it goes nowhere.
It gets ignored. I'm afraid that there's a lot of special interests, a lot of people who line the coffers of congressmen and senators who are I want to make a lot of talk on this issue, or even just be hawkish, talk on China in general.
But when push comes to shove, they don't sign onto legislation, or they're simply paying lip service to it.
I think the West in general right now is in a crisis of leadership.
We have a president who's not always mentally present.
Janet Yellen is in Beijing right now, and she's certainly no Margaret Thatcher, no Iron Lady.
And of course, in Europe, we have a very weak British government under Rishi Sunak, which is the Conservative Party, is effectively a socialist, woke government.
And of course, that pretty much You know, resounds around Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand the same.
In the 1970s, when we were negotiating the most favored nation status, Henry Kissinger took the view that this was something that we were not going to agree to the repudiation of this debt, but it was something that we weren't going to discuss and kick the tin down the road to a later date and put the onus on the bondholders to try to pursue payment.
And sadly, that has failed.
There has been a lot of, you know, In domestic case law, there was Jackson et al.
versus the People's Republic of China, where the courts in this country agreed, yes, under successor government doctrine, this was indeed the responsibility of the PRC to pay.
But again, there was no ability by a domestic court in the United States to enforce this upon the People's Republic of China.
What needs to happen is that the Securities and Exchange Commission needs to ensure that China It cannot issue new sovereign debt in the United States until it has honored this debt.
It is an outrage that the three main credit rating agencies, S&P, Moody's, and Fitch's, do not incorporate this selective defaulted sovereign debt in their credit rating of China, but at the same time give them an A rating.
That is an outrage that has changed, and the Securities and Exchange Commission can compel those three rating agencies to do so, and Congress is going to require the SEC to do that through legislation.
But yes, again, I've been at—yes, go on.
No, what's your call to action for the audience?
You're saying for the SEC and for the Biden regime, which kowtows.
I mean, you've had Tony Blinken over there.
You've got Yellen's kowtowing.
I mean, last night, they didn't invite her.
They didn't even have, like, a banquet for her.
She's wandering around, you know, getting some food at some restaurant down the street.
They treat us like a tributary state.
So what would be your recommendation?
This audience, and by the way, they were so fired up in the early years of pandemic on this topic, we can do it again because it's an outrage, but what specifically would you want this audience to do, and what are you calling on Congress and the administration to do?
I would encourage members of your audience listening to write to their senators and congressmen in the House and Senate to support legislation that would bring this issue to the fore.
We want, for example, this defaulted sovereign debt We want the SEC to ensure, and Congress can require this, that China is no longer permitted to issue new sovereign debt In the United States until they've honored this debt.
Now, China has used words like historic debt to describe this.
I'm sorry. But the United Kingdom just literally in 2015 paid debt that they issued in the 18th century, the 1700s.
Germany paid off its first World War I debt in 2010.
So again, there's no statute of limitations on this.
It's an asymmetry injustice that China has chosen to pay British bondholders, but not American bondholders.
And the U.S. federal government needs to hold China to account.
Also, there's another thing you could do, which we could even go further.
The U.S. government, there's over 20,000 of these bonds held, as you've had John and Bianco and officers of the American Bondholders Foundation on your program before.
Now, they have the power of attorney over 20,000 of these bonds.
That's 90% of those bonds held in the United States by American citizens.
The U.S. Treasury could simply purchase these, put them on their books, and then, of course, have that in there, and they could do so at the behest of the U.S. president, and then have this in their arsenal at a time for a future negotiation.
Andrew, we've got to bounce real quickly.
This is a brilliant piece.
How do they get to the piece? How do they get to you on social media to find out more about you?
You can find me on the Heritage Foundation website.
You can find me also on Twitter at DrewHaleDC.
And of course, you can read my op-ed, Andrew Hale, my op-ed in The Hill.
Yeah, we're putting it out right now in the live chat.
Andrew, magnificent piece.
We look forward to having you back on here.
Thanks for carving time out today to do it.
Thank you so much, Steve.
It's been a pleasure. Okay, tomorrow morning, 10 o'clock, we're going to do it again.
The show will be lit.
Part of the show tomorrow is we'll walk through the details of the precinct strategy, how it's impacting American political life, the MAGA movement.
Also, how the establishment is pushing back.
They're going to say, hey, you're going to take over these state parties.
Tough guy. You take them over.
Export Selection