All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 21, 2023 - Bannon's War Room
54:56
Episode 3043: The Public Humiliation Of The Justice Department
Participants
Main voices
j
julie kelly
07:46
s
steve bannon
14:13
Appearances
a
alex degrasse
03:18
d
donald j trump
04:26
e
elon musk
01:15
j
joe allen
01:44
m
matt gaetz
02:32
m
mike johnson
02:01
Clips
t
thomas massie
00:11
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼
endorsement I said I don't know I did say this one of the few times I was I made a statement wasn't totally I said if George Washington and Abraham Lincoln came back from the dead run and they endorse you you'd still lose you lose it by so much he said no you're very popular in Florida I love Florida he said if you endorse me I think I'll win and I I gave him an endorsement.
I didn't know the other person.
He was Secretary of Agriculture, Adam Putnam.
I hear he's a good man, but I didn't know him.
So I gave him an endorsement, and he was like a rocket ship.
Just from the endorsement, he went up.
He won a few days later.
I mean, literally, a short time later, he won the primary.
Then he ran against somebody who turned out to be a crackhead, but he was the hottest politician in the Democrat Party.
Remember?
Good-looking guy.
He was going to be, you know, automatic.
He was going to be a president someday.
unidentified
Lots of luck.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼
I hope he has an easier pet than I had.
But he was going to be a president someday, and Ron said, I won't be able to beat him.
I said, Ron, I'm going to give you a couple of big Trump rallies, and you're going to beat him.
And we gave him rallies, and he won.
And then four years later, they scream at him, these lunatics in the back, the press.
Will you, will you run against the president?
They said to him.
And he looked at him.
I have no comment.
I said, no comment.
This guy has no comment.
That means he's running.
And I started hitting him from the following day, you know, and I got a lot of heat.
A lot of people, people would call, sir, you shouldn't attack him.
He's a Republican.
I said, I don't care.
Difference is that much.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
This is the war room.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼
We're going to continue with the coverage from Dubuque, Iowa.
And you see how he's done.
He's been like a bird, sadly wounded, very badly wounded, actually, in flight.
So, he's been crashing.
And we just got a poll, and I think New Hampshire, he's in fifth place.
So, I wish him a lot of luck.
You know, when you're loyal, and my consultants say, okay, paid all this money, they don't know much, okay?
I want to use the word crap, but then I get myself in trouble.
The First Lady says, darling, you shouldn't use that word.
Sometimes I'll say hell.
She said, darling, you shouldn't use that word.
I don't know.
So I won't use the word crap.
I won't use it.
But they don't know too much.
It doesn't sound as good when you say that, right?
They don't know too much.
They don't know crap.
unidentified
Right, Wesley?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼
Wesley knows what I'm talking about, right?
But anyway, but they said the people don't care about loyalty.
Look, they don't care if he was loyal to you or not.
Don't even mention it.
I said, let me do my own thing if you don't mind.
They said, you'll never run for president because nobody ever became president unless you were a general.
Did you know that?
Ninety two percent of the people were politicians and eight percent were generals.
So I wasn't a politician.
I wasn't a general.
And I ran.
They said, you won't win.
So these are the same people that are telling me this.
But with Ron, they said, nobody cares about his loyalty to you.
I said, I'm not going to take it off the table.
I'm going to — and you know what?
I think it's one of the big reasons that he's failed so badly.
Second of all, he is not a talented politician, obviously, because he hasn't done very well.
But, you know, when you get somebody — Wesley — here's a guy who's loyal to me.
I gave him an indictment.
By the way, I think Wesley would say I helped him a hell of a lot, right?
But he's somebody that appreciates it.
I think people should appreciate it.
I appreciate it when people do things for me.
But this guy didn't appreciate it, so I hit him exceedingly hard.
Some people say, why do you hit him so hard?
Because I gave him the position, I made him, and then he announced he was going to run against me.
That's a bad seed.
That's a bad seed.
In the CBS poll, I'm beating Biden and leading by, in some cases, 15 points with independents.
Remember, they used to say, well, Trump has a problem with independents.
I don't think so.
Then they said, Trump has a problem with women.
No, I don't have a problem with women.
unidentified
You know, the women... I don't have a problem with them.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼
You know what the women want?
The women want more than — they don't want crime.
They want to have strong borders.
They don't want people pouring into their neighborhoods and sleeping on their lawn.
They were talking about the suburban women.
I think I did great with suburban women, okay?
They want to see a well-run country.
That's what women want.
And we're doing great with everybody now.
We're doing great with everybody.
And yesterday's morning console poll, 46 points, not 46 points, but 46 points.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
We're going to put it up on our Rumble page, on our Getter page, my Getter page, continue.
But President Trump, I know, wants everyone to see this.
I want to go, we've done a compilation, my crack production team and the RAV team in Denver.
have done a concise compilation of Merrick Garland today in front of the house.
Let's go ahead and play this and we'll come back to President Trump's speech.
Let's go ahead and hit it.
unidentified
And our job is to uphold the rule of law.
That means we apply the same laws to everyone.
There is not one set of laws for the powerful and another for the powerless, one for the rich and another for the poor, one for Democrats and another for Republicans, or different rules depending upon one's race or ethnicity or religion.
Our job is to pursue justice without fear or favor.
Our job is not to do what is politically convenient.
Our job is not to take orders from the President, from Congress, or from anyone else about who or what to criminally investigate.
As the President himself has said, and I reaffirm today, I am not the President's lawyer.
I will add, I am not Congress's prosecutor.
The Justice Department works for the American people.
Our job is to follow the facts and the law, and that is what we do.
All of us recognize that with this work comes public scrutiny, criticism, and legitimate oversight.
These are appropriate and important given the matters and the gravity of the matters that are before the Department.
But singling out individual career public servants who are just doing their jobs is dangerous, particularly at a time of increased threats to the safety of public servants and their families.
We will not be intimidated.
We will do our jobs free from outside influence.
And we will not back down from defending our democracy.
Third, I want to explain why we approach our job in this way.
The Justice Department was founded in the wake of the Civil War and in the midst of Reconstruction with the first principal task of bringing to justice white supremacists and others who terrorize black Americans to prevent them from exercising their civil rights.
The Justice Department's job then and now is to fulfill the promise that it is at the foundation of our democracy that the law will treat each of us alike.
That promise is also why I am here.
My family fled religious persecution in Eastern Europe at the start of the 20th century.
My grandmother, who was one of five children born in what is now Belarus, made it to the United States, as did two of her siblings.
The other two did not.
Those two were killed in the Holocaust, and there There's little doubt that but for America, the same thing would have happened to my grandmother.
But this country took her in and under the protection of our laws.
She was able to live without fear of persecution.
That protection is what distinguishes this country from so many others.
The protection of law, the rule of law, is the foundation of our system of government.
Repaying this country for the debt my family owes, for our very lives, has been the focus of my entire professional career.
That is why I served in the Justice Department under five different Attorneys General under both Democratic and Republican administrations.
That is why I spent more than 25 years ensuring the rule of law as a judge, And that is why I left a lifetime appointment as a judge and came back to the Justice Department two and a half years ago.
And that is why I'm here today.
I look forward to your questions.
I hold you accountable for the labeling of parents as domestic terrorists standing up for the proper education of their own children.
I hold you accountable for the anti-Catholic memo.
Imagine sending agents undercover into Roman Catholic churches because they were supposedly domestic terrorists.
And I hold you accountable for unleashing a special counsel with a history of botched investigations on our current president's political rival.
The department under your leadership, I am sorry to say, and I am sorry to say, has become an enforcement arm of the Democratic National Committee.
If there is a perceived threat to the Democratic Party, this DOJ attacks every single time.
But when there are actionable threats against conservatives, this DOJ stays put.
Violent protesters outside the Supreme Court, Justice's home, unpunished.
Attacks on pro-life centers?
Unpunished.
The two-tiered system of justice is clear, and it's clear to the American public.
And the buck stops with the man in charge.
That man is you.
The actions of the DOJ are on you.
The decline of Americans' trust in our federal law enforcement is on you.
The political weaponization of the DOJ is on you.
Attorney General, I need a simple yes or no to the following.
Just yes or no, because we don't have much time.
Do you agree that traditional Catholics are violent extremists?
Yes or no?
Let me answer what you've said in that long list of arguments.
I'll be happy to answer all of those.
Attorney General, I control the time.
I'm going to ask you to answer the questions I ask.
You control time by asking me a substantial number of things.
I didn't ask you those things.
I made a statement.
Attorney General, through the chair, I ask you, do you agree that traditional Catholics are violent extremists?
Answer the question.
I have no idea what traditional means here.
Catholics!
Catholics!
Then go to church!
May I answer your question?
Yes, you can!
The idea that someone with my family background...
Would discriminate against any religion is so outrageous, so absurd.
Mr. Attorney General, it was your FBI that did this.
It was your FBI that was sending, and we have the memos, we have the emails, were sending undercover agents into Catholic churches.
Both I and the director of the FBI have said we were appalled.
Have said that we were appalled by that memo.
So then you agree that they're not extremists?
We were appalled by that memo.
Are they extremists or not, Attorney General?
I think that... Are they extremists or not, Attorney General?
Everything in that memo is appalling.
Are they extremists or not?
I'm asking a simple question.
Say no if you think that was wrong.
Catholics are not extremists.
No.
Was anyone fired for drafting and circulating the anti-Catholic memo?
You have in front of you the inspection division's investigation.
Just tell me yes or no, please.
I don't know.
We have no time.
I don't know the answer to that.
thomas massie ▲ ● ▼
When I said how many agents or assets of the government were present on January 5th and January 6th and agitating in the crowd to go into the Capitol and how many went into the Capitol, can you answer that now?
unidentified
I don't know the answer to that question.
Oh, last time, you don't know how many there were or there were none?
I don't know the answer to either of those questions.
If there were any, I don't know how many.
I don't know whether there are any.
I think you may have just perjured yourself that you don't know that there were any.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼
You want to say that again?
joe allen ▲ ● ▼
That you don't know that there were any?
unidentified
I have no personal knowledge of this matter.
I think what I said the last time... You've had two years to find out, and the day... By the way, that was in reference to Ray Epps, and yesterday you indicted him!
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼
Isn't that a wonderful coincidence?
On a misdemeanor!
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Meanwhile, you're sending grandmas to prison.
unidentified
You're putting people away for 20 years for merely filming.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼
Some people weren't even there yet.
unidentified
You've got the guy on video who's saying, go into the Capitol.
He's directing people to the Capitol before the speech ends.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
He's at the site of the first breach.
unidentified
You've got all the goods on him, 10 videos, and it's an indictment for a misdemeanor?
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
The American public isn't buying it.
I yield the balance of my time to Chairman Jordan.
unidentified
May I answer the question?
matt gaetz ▲ ● ▼
I want to so it was a lot of Chinese money that was working its way through these shell companies into the accounts of the Biden family.
So the China initiative was set up during the Trump administration at the Department of Justice to go after the malign influence of the Chinese Communist Party and The Biden Justice Department dissolved the China Initiative.
So I guess I'm wondering, does the department have any documents that would detail the basis for why you got rid of the China Initiative that President Trump had set up?
unidentified
The Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division gave a long speech which explained that.
He has testified before Congress several times.
We'd be happy to provide you with- What's the basis?
matt gaetz ▲ ● ▼
Just tell us all now.
Why was the China Initiative dissolved?
unidentified
What the Assistant Attorney General said was that we face attacks from four nation states.
North Korea, China, Russia, and Iran.
And we need to focus our attention on the broad range of these attacks.
Sometimes we don't know... Wait a second.
matt gaetz ▲ ● ▼
Are you saying that North Korea Has the same malign influence risk to the United States as the Chinese Communist Party?
Are you trying to represent there's some parody there?
Because here's what it looks like.
It looks like the Chinese gave all this money to the Bidens and then you guys came in and got rid of the China initiative and it was successful.
I saw one rationale that you guys got rid of the China initiative because it was racial profiling.
But one of the people you convicted was a guy named Charles Lieber, who was a Harvard professor taking $50,000 a month to do China's bidding and give them whatever research was being done.
Are you aware of the millions of dollars that moved through Rob Walker's shell companies from Chinese Communist Party entities into Biden family bank accounts?
Are you aware of that?
unidentified
There are a lot of questions that you just asked.
Let me start with the first one about North Korea.
North Korea is a dangerous actor, both kinetically and with respect to cyber.
matt gaetz ▲ ● ▼
But not on par with China.
I'm on the armed services committee, Mr. Attorney General.
I'm not in the business right now of making... Okay, it makes you look unserious to suggest that.
unidentified
May I answer your question?
matt gaetz ▲ ● ▼
Answer the question about whether or not you know about all the millions of dollars that... Well, you don't want me to answer about North Korea.
I already know the answer, and so does everyone.
They're not the same risk as China.
So let's get on to serious questions and serious answers.
Do you know about the money that moved through Rob Walker's shell companies, yes or no?
unidentified
As I have said repeatedly, I have left these matters to Mr. Weiss.
I've not intruded, I've not interfered, I've not tried to find out what he knows.
matt gaetz ▲ ● ▼
It's like you're looking the other way on purpose because everybody knows this stuff's happening.
And you know what?
People don't pay bribes to not get something in return.
Right?
The China initiative resulted in the convictions of a Harvard professor, of someone at Monsanto.
So we were working against the Chinese, they paid the Bidens, and now you're sitting here telling me that North Korea is the big threat.
I gotta get to this one thing on January 6th.
So did the FBI lose count of the number of paid informants on January 6th?
unidentified
Let me answer your question about China.
matt gaetz ▲ ● ▼
I want you to answer this question.
I only get five minutes.
You've already sort of, I think, screwed the pooch on China.
So January 6th, did you lose count of the number of federal assets?
Did you lose count and order an audit?
unidentified
Gentlemen, his time has expired.
matt gaetz ▲ ● ▼
I get an answer to the question of did he lose count?
unidentified
Let him answer the question.
His time has expired.
The Attorney General can respond.
China is the most aggressive, most dangerous adversary the United States faces, and we are doing everything within our power to rebut that, to stop that, to prevent their invasions, both kinetic and through cyberspace.
And we will continue to do that.
matt gaetz ▲ ● ▼
If someone gave that answer in your courtroom when you were a judge, you would tell them they were being non-responsive and you would direct them to answer the question.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Has anyone from the White House provided direction at any time to you personally or to any senior officials at the DOJ regarding how the Hunter Biden investigation was to be carried out?
unidentified
No.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Have you had personal contact with anyone at FBI headquarters about the Hunter Biden investigation?
unidentified
Uh, I don't recollect the answer to that question, but the FBI works for the Justice Department.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
You don't recollect whether you've talked with anybody at FBI headquarters about an investigation of the President's son?
unidentified
I don't believe that I did.
I promised the Senate when I came before it for confirmation that I would leave Mr. Weiss in place and that I would not interfere with his investigation.
I have kept that promise.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Have you had personal contact with anybody at the Baltimore field office on the Hunter Biden matter?
No.
On July 10, 2023, U.S.
Attorney David Weiss told Senator Lindsey Graham, quote, I had discussions with departmental officials regarding potential appointment under 28 U.S.C.
Section 515, which would have allowed me to file charges in a district outside my own without the partnership of the local U.S.
Attorney, end quote.
With whom did Mr. Weiss have those discussions?
unidentified
I'm not going to get into the internal deliberations of the department.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Oh, but you must, sir.
This is important for us.
We have oversight responsibility over your department, and we need these answers.
unidentified
It's appropriate and necessary for Mr. Weiss to have conversations with the department.
I made clear that if he wanted to bring a case to any jurisdiction, he would be able to do that.
The way you do that is to get an order signed by the Attorney General called a 515 order.
I promised he would be able to do that, and he, in his letters, made clear he understood he would be able to do that.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Okay, can you tell us about any briefings or discussions that you personally have had with Mr. Weiss regarding any and all federal investigations of Hunter Biden?
unidentified
I'm going to say again, I promised the Senate that I would not interfere with Mr. Weiss.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
So you have not, I'm just saying, under oath today, your testimony is you have not had any discussions with Mr. Weiss about this matter?
unidentified
Under oath, my testimony today is that I promised the Senate I would not intrude in his investigation.
I do not intend to discuss Okay, so your testimony today is you're not going to tell us whether you've had discussions with Mr. Weiss.
I told the committee that I would not interfere.
I made clear that Mr. Weiss would have the authority to bring cases that he thought were appropriate.
Mr. Weiss's letter... Okay, let me stop you.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
For a second time, sir, are you aware that FBI officials have come before this committee and they have stated that there was a cumbersome bureaucratic process that Mr. Weiss had to go through to bring charges in another judicial district?
You know that?
unidentified
I'm not aware, but that's not true.
There's nothing cumbersome about the process.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
So those whistleblowers are lying to us under oath?
Those whistleblowers are lying?
unidentified
I didn't say that.
Their description of the process, cumbersome, is an opinion.
It's not a fact question.
All I have to do is sign a section.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Let me get to the fact.
Mr. Weiss has been the lead prosecutor on the Hunter Biden case since 2018, correct?
unidentified
I'm sorry?
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Mr. Weiss has been the lead prosecutor on the Hunter Biden case since 2018.
Now here's the question.
unidentified
I've been the lead prosecutor since he was appointed by President Trump.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Okay, let me ask you.
Why has the Justice Department dragged this investigation out for so long?
Does it really take years to determine if Hunter Biden lied on a federal form related to purchasing a firearm?
unidentified
Mr. Weiss.
You're not answering the question.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Is that standard procedure?
Should it take that long to make such a simple determination?
unidentified
I'm answering the question.
Give me an opportunity to do so.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
Okay.
unidentified
He was charged with that investigation under the previous administration.
He's continued.
He knows how to conduct investigations, and I have not intruded or attempted to evaluate that, because that was the promise I made to the Senate.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼
The whistleblowers gave us testimony about serious misconduct of the Justice Department in regards to the preferential treatment afforded Hunter Biden.
Has your office requested an investigation into that?
unidentified
There are well-known processes for how whistleblowers make their claims.
I'm a strong proponent of whistleblowers and a strong defender.
We have an inspector general's office.
We have an office of professional responsibility.
That is the way in which complaints from whistleblowers Should be and are appropriately handled.
American not to be afraid of my government.
But I wanted to tell you and I want to share with you and get your thoughts on that.
Are you aware that a lot of Americans are now afraid of being prosecuted by your department?
Are you aware about that?
Are you aware of that?
I'm just saying are you aware or not?
I think that constant attacks on the department and saying... It's not attacks.
Let me give you an example.
We're talking about January 6th.
I'm sorry?
Some people came on January 6th.
There probably were some people that came on January 6th here, you know, that had bad intent.
But a lot of good Americans from my district came here because they are sick and tired of this government not serving them.
They came with strollers and the kids, and there was chaotic situation because the proper security wasn't provided.
That's a question that was answered really why.
Why we debated for 45 minutes on the floor and didn't stop the debate after the people broke in into the Capitol.
But these people came, they were throwing the smoke bombs into the crowd with strollers with kids.
People were showed up, you know, FBI agent to people's houses.
You had in my district, in my town, FBI phone numbers all over the district.
Please call.
Call that.
People are truly afraid.
I just want to make sure if you're not aware that you are.
And this is a big problem when people are afraid of their own government.
And I'll show you some other things.
We're talking about justice system.
I don't question.
You're probably not a bad person.
I don't know you.
But what I'll tell you, you're in charge of the department.
And people right now feel, you know, I look at the Durham report and I call on the FISA violations of queries of millions of Americans, right?
It's like KGB, but when I read Durham reports, we have this, you have a nice, you know, playbook.
First, let's have a special counsel, and then you don't have to answer any questions here.
Then, let's extend slow-walk investigation on Hillary Clinton, on Hunter.
Everything is slow-walk.
We were very quick on Donald Trump, but you were very slow-walk.
Then, by the time, you know that investigation ended, Statue of Limitation expired, and all of your agents need to be tested for amnesia.
No one recalls anything.
Okay, you probably should have as part of your hiring policy.
So no one held accountable, which was egregious what happened, you know, in that report.
When I read about that, I can't believe it happened in the United States of America.
This is my frustration.
I'll be honest with you.
It's very interesting.
You know, regardless of what it is, even people in the Obama administration raised concerns.
You know, how can President Sands be serving on, you know, corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs?
Do you understand that it actually can undermine the one Ukrainian effort on policy?
I think these concerns were raised.
The Obama administration didn't do anything about it.
These people are dying right now, and Americans don't trust this president.
So you, I want to ask you one thing, you know, as you, you know, I don't need answer because I know you're not going to, but I think you're probably good American and you care.
And a lot of these people are so afraid they cover up this stuff, I think, in your department because they're embarrassed that what we became as a country to say that what our department is justice became.
That allows Russians to do propaganda in Chinese.
It allows them to destabilize our country.
That is danger to our republic.
It is significant danger, and I have just one more question from you.
You know, I mean, I agree on corporate crimes and FISA stuff, even with Democrats, that we need to do a better job.
One more question for you.
Do you believe that, you know, you talk about rights to vote, but do you believe that only U.S.
citizens should be voting in this election and doing anything to make sure that only eligible people vote in elections?
Yes, and yes.
Okay, I would like to see that what you do.
Thank you.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Um, Merrick Garland is not a good person, not a good American, that blubber and open and think that the country took him in and he said it was about the rule of law.
It was the American people that took his predecessors in, the American people.
And many of those people, the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those people that he's put in prison illegally are the ones that went and liberated Liberate it.
The French didn't do it.
The Italians didn't do it.
The Scandinavians didn't do it.
The British were outsized, but the American people in this heartland did it.
And that's the thing.
He is a purely evil individual.
He's a purely evil individual.
Let me repeat that.
He's a purely evil and right there he lied and perjured himself time and time again and obfuscated.
And that's what, by the way, we could have doubled that to 30 minutes of the intensity, the anger of the people's representatives about this guy lying.
And to him to make that big blubbery open and then to say, I don't know what a traditional Catholic is.
He couldn't answer the question, he couldn't answer the question and never really answer the question about the Catholics.
Which, that memo started about my parents who were the hobbits of the hobbits Latin Mass Parish.
He is an evil individual, and he will pay for that evilness when we imprison him after we take over in 2025 for what he has done to this country.
And he perjured himself right there.
Thomas Massey, he perjured himself.
You're telling me that the Attorney... Julie Kelly, help me out here.
You've been on this morning, buddy.
Are you telling me that the Attorney General of the United States Three years after this thing, doesn't know how many FBI assets, how many federal assets they had in the crowd around January 6th?
How dumb does he think the American people are?
He is an evil man, he is a weak man, and he will pay for his evilness, and he will pay for his weakness, and he will pay for what he did to this country.
Julie Kelly.
julie kelly ▲ ● ▼
You know, Steve, there's a good chance that he doesn't know exactly how many FBI informants or undercover agents were in the crowd provoking the events that day.
But for him to suggest that there were none, maybe he needs a briefing from his own line prosecutors who are handling the January 6th trials.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Julie, Julie, Julie, hang on, hang on, hang on, stop, stop.
He's Attorney General of the United States.
This is the most contrary, it's the biggest, I follow somebody named Julie Kelly.
It's the biggest prosecution, they brag about this, in the history of the nation.
This is bigger than getting the communists in the 40s and 50s.
This is bigger than getting the anti-Semenese Liberation Army, the KKK, the Black Panthers, all of them in the 1960s.
This is bigger, this is a bigger investigation than getting the Islamic Jihadist terrorists that took down the World Trade Center and killed 2,900 Americans in cold blood.
They brag about this is the biggest in history.
The biggest in history.
How can he not know a basic question in three years?
Like, hey, Chris Wray, just tell me.
I'm gonna take a note here.
How many total feds have?
It's a lie.
It's a bald-faced lie.
It's a bald-faced lie, ma'am.
julie kelly ▲ ● ▼
It is a bald-faced lie.
Because he definitely knows, as I said, that there were some.
He may not know the exact number.
But he is lying, and he's lying on a number of fronts.
But I'm going to tell you something, Steve.
And guess what, Merrick Garland?
I think about my grandparents a lot, too, when I'm covering January 6th.
Because they went to Europe in late 1944, 45, and helped save your continent and save many of your relatives.
And you know what I think when I think of my grandparents who are gone?
That this is not the country that they risked their lives, that their friends and siblings lost their lives for.
So people like Merrick Garland and Matthew Graves and Lisa Monaco can do to this country what they're doing.
So Merrick Garland, you're not the only one who thinks about your grandparents when you're watching what's happening in this country.
I think of them too, Steve.
You and I have actually talked about them.
And I mean, I manage not to get choked up when I talk about my grandparents because I'm grown up.
But my grandparents would be very offended and disgusted At what Merrick Garland's DOJ is doing to half of this country.
And so shame on him for, you know, playing, you know, rolling out the tears and getting choked up so he can defend what he's doing.
Weaponizing his department, criminalizing political dissent, rounding up people to this day, more than 1100 Americans criminally charged for doing nothing on January 6th.
And I want to say, Good for Victoria Sparks.
I was critical of her early on because she's a big defender of Ukraine, which is fine.
But she showed the most passion today, and she got right to the heart of the issue, is that her constituents are afraid.
They are afraid, not a knock on the door of the FBI, a 5.30 a.m.
armed raid with battering rams and SWAT vehicles.
Because that's what's happening under Merrick Garland's DOJ, and he can cry all he wants about his grandparents, but how many grandparents, parents, children, families, is he destroying, responsible for destroying?
A lot.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
He's an evil, he's a small evil man, and every night before I go to bed, I thank God that I had a tiny, tiny role in making sure that he was not a lifetime appointee to the Supreme Court of the United States, because he is an evil person.
And people should know, come 2025, it's going to be a different deal.
We're going to get to the bottom of all of it, and we're going to hold him accountable.
And we're going to see Merrick Garland perp-walked.
Julie, give me your overall assessment, because today was pretty extraordinary.
In the house, of lighting this guy up consistently.
Just put it in perspective.
What did we learn today?
And how do we go forward in really making a case against what he's done on January 6th?
And of course, part of the reason the CR is not coming forward is people are saying, hey, McCarthy promised all the J6 footage.
He promised to get on top of these investigations.
Nothing's happened.
What do you think we learned today?
julie kelly ▲ ● ▼
I mean, obviously the huge dual standard of justice.
I mean, Merrick Garland should be perjured simply for his statement claiming that he is instituting a fair system of justice.
I mean, the idea that he is not favoring Democrats over Republicans or charging Republicans or conservatives more than Democrats.
is utterly laughable.
I mean, we know that that simply is not the case.
He should be charged with perjury, just he should charge himself for perjury for that.
So the dual system of justice was on full display.
Personally, I wish they had not spent so much time on the David Weiss issue that's still unfolding.
I would have liked to have seen Merrick Garland in the hot seat For seeking terror enhancements for non-violent individuals and their sentencing for January 6 convictions.
I would have loved for someone to ask him if he thought that Trump supporters can get a fair trial in Washington, D.C.
because, of course, he's opposing every single change of venue motion.
I would have liked to see more on CHS's, especially not just January 6, but related to the Fednapping hoax.
He was an AG then.
But his Department of Justice prosecuted the four individuals who faced federal charges.
So I think overall, it was good to see passion from House Republicans.
It was good to see them drill down on what exactly Merrick Garland is doing.
But there is a lot more to be learned.
And it does seem like they are focused on getting more information, not just about the Weiss-Hunter Biden investigation.
But the handling of January 6th and other politically charged investigations.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Talk to me about, talk to me about this report out, the question that got answered that he slipped out of, I think, on these, what's this report that's coming out that they couldn't even manage?
They had so many Fed assets on J6, they couldn't even manage it.
Just walk people through what the facts we know about this and why is it coming out now?
julie kelly ▲ ● ▼
So this was based on a transcript released last night by House Judiciary, and this was the transcribed interview with Stephen D'Antuono.
D'Antuono was the head of the Detroit FBI field office during the Whitmer Fednapping hoax.
He was promoted in October of 2020 to take over the Washington field office.
So he was the one responsible for taking all of the intelligence that the FBI was getting He's really the key figure in both of those issues.
What he told the House Judiciary Committee over the summer is that he had no idea how many FBI informants from various field offices were on the ground or present on January 6th.
And that they were getting so many questions about it that the FBI headquarters had to conduct a survey with the FBI field offices to see how many CHS's informants were involved either before or on January 6th.
So he did not know.
Now I will say he probably didn't know.
And I don't really condemn him for not necessarily knowing because it's true.
That these field offices could have sent CHSs who they had embedded in groups like the Proud Boys, for example, or the Oath Keepers, which we know that they did.
But look, more than three years removed.
To your point, Steve, we demand those answers.
The idea that the DOJ and FBI, to this day, for an event that they compare to 9-11, that they compare to Pearl Harbor and the Oklahoma City bombing, they still think that they can get away without telling us, giving us some amount of data.
About FBI informants and undercover agents who were involved before and on January 6th.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
They're not going to do it.
They're not going to do it.
They're not going to do it until you start bringing charges against these guys.
They're not going to do it.
That's right.
They were in back of that and they understand it and we should have all the information now.
This shows you the weakness.
And right now Kevin McCarthy is putting up another.
I just want to give a news break here.
He's going to put forward a stopgap funding.
He's going to have some cuts.
He's going to actually Add a commission to look at the debt problem.
This is a joke.
And he's going to attach H.R.
unidentified
2.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
These are all shiny toys.
They think you're a group of morons.
The answer in the C.R.
is no.
Get back to the appropriation process and let's get the massive cuts.
He continues at CR now they're going to have a commission on debt.
They think you're a moron.
We don't need a commission on debt.
It's not that complicated.
Okay?
We don't need a commission.
It's going to take two years and call some witnesses and then have a bunch of recommendation and nothing happens.
That is what you pitch on Fox.
Go to Fox.
Go on Hannity Tonight and pitch that.
That's what the Fox audience, the passive Fox audience, they'll nod their head and say, oh, that's interesting.
We'll get a commission on debt.
No, it's ridiculous.
Stop insulting people.
Where do we go from here, Julie?
What do you want to see?
Because people are getting fired up now.
The reason Sparx is so fired up and these people are so fired up and Van Drew, their constituents got a bayonet to the back right now saying, you heard her, that people are furious.
The more they hear about this, the more they see people getting uptick terrorist charges for 40 years.
For 40 years in prison, and nothing happens to BLM, nothing happens to the Chinese Communist Party people here, nothing happens to the Marxists and the Uniparty globalists that they're protecting in this evil dwarf, because that's who he is, evil blubbering dwarf.
Like the beginning with the tears.
unidentified
Oh, stop.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Will you stop it?
I'm getting all choked up.
It's so ridiculous.
Right before, because he knows he's gonna get hammered with the Catholic question.
If he's so concerned about religions, why did you go into Catholic churches and try to roll up the hobbits?
Answer the question.
And if not, they should drag him out.
He's sitting there lying to your face, this little evil dwarf.
Julie Kelly.
julie kelly ▲ ● ▼
Well, I'm going to do one worse than Merrick Garland, and that is watching his line prosecutors in action.
If you think that Merrick Garland is evil, you should see what these line prosecutors are doing in the courtroom, what they're saying about defendants, what they're getting away with, even worse, what they're getting away with in the courtrooms of, say, Judge Tim Kelly, who we talked about.
Another reason why we don't know more about the deep FBI involvement in January 6th is the cover-up by DOJ, not just people like Merrick Garland, his line prosecutors, but also judges who refuse to let jurors hear from FBI informants, who refuse, who conceal documentation about the number of FBI informants in certain cases, like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers.
When defense wants to call some of these informants as defense witnesses, they are immediately denied by the judges.
So, you know, this is a collaborative effort.
We should know a lot more, just like what we found out in Whitmer.
I mean, we found out there were at least a dozen FBI informants.
We found out that there were at least three undercover agents.
We found out that there were numerous supervising agents out of multiple field offices involved in this.
So why can't we find out the same in Washington?
Well, because it is the same rigged system, this banana republic style climate that every January 6th defendant has to deal with.
And it is a coordinated effort to cover up what the FBI and other government agents did.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
If he had respected, if he had true respect for the nation, That reached out their arms and took in his ancestors and protected them and then went and liberated, destroyed the industrial murder of the Jews.
Destroyed it, root and branch, and freed the camp.
So if he had true respect for that, he would not be doing what he's doing today to patriots.
He's a evil, evil, evil man and he will pay for his evilness.
Okay?
As sure as the turning of the earth.
Julie Kelley, how do people follow you, ma'am?
julie kelly ▲ ● ▼
Declassified with Julie Kelley is my substack.
Twitter, Julie underscore Kelley 2.
And true social, Julie underscore Kelley.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Thank you, ma'am.
He perjured himself today.
There should be immediate charges brought.
This is going to be, by the way, this is going to be a massive investigation starting on the afternoon of the 20th of January in the year of our Lord 2025.
Now, for some of us, that's too far away.
The House should do this immediately.
And Jim Jordan, I thought Jim Jordan was extraordinarily weak today.
I thought he was weak.
I thought he was way too differential.
They need more attack dogs in there.
You need attack dogs.
Because that's all they relate to.
That's all they can respond to.
Otherwise, this is going to lie to you continually.
Everybody's on offense in Wisconsin with impeachments.
Everybody's on offense in New York State, a big lawsuit.
Let's bring in Alex DeGrasse Tyson.
By the way, I want to thank Real America's Voice for blowing the brakes here for this coverage of the President's speech and Garland's testimony.
Alex DeGrasse, you're in the war room, brother.
This is kind of a bombshell.
It's Stefanik versus Holko and it's about the elections.
Stefanik threw down today.
Tell me about the lawsuit.
alex degrasse ▲ ● ▼
It's huge, Steve.
Many Republican donors, certainly many members of the posse are always asking, what are Republicans doing?
What is the plan, of course?
And in New York State, there's nothing more egregious than the way we run our elections, sadly.
And they're taking it even further by allowing Unregulated mass mail-in ballots all across New York State.
In fact, they're even going against the state constitution.
Unlike some other states that have been fighting the good fight to oppose what Mark Elias and these folks have been doing, in New York the state constitution explicitly states that those who want an absentee ballot must be either ineligible to vote in person because they are either sick Or away from their voting location on election day or during the early vote period.
This law circumvents state constitution.
Something, Steve, that was put on the ballot in 2021 because that's what you have to do in New York for a constitutional matter.
You need to have a ballot amendment.
And we beat it by like 15 percentage points in New York state.
If you remember, we were talking about that and we had a victory.
So they failed to change it in the constitution.
And now they think they can redefine the word Absentee ballot and turning into oh, it's not an absentee ballot It's a mail-in ballot and just like they've done and we've spoken about on this show So we've sued we've partied up with national and state Republicans at least is putting your name on the line here and we're gonna be in court and we're gonna fight this thing and we have to stop it or we will lose our state and all of the gains that we've talked about here Steve on the show in New York as really the central battleground will certainly be lost of course
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Because, because here's the key, here's the key point, correct me if I'm wrong.
They understand that if they don't get these mail-in ballots and you just flood them with all the phony registrations, they actually can't win.
The people in New York are actually MAGA when you look at the entire state in its totality.
In particular, they see what's happening in New York City, in the boroughs.
This thing is coming our way hard and they're in panic mode.
That's what, if they don't have these mass mail-in ballots, there's no chance they can win, correct?
alex degrasse ▲ ● ▼
Absolutely.
I mean, Steve, the numbers look so strong for Republicans.
We're going into the local elections.
For those of you guys watching, every vote counts.
We've got town supervisor, county legislators, everything's on the line.
We need a sweeping Republican victory this November, November 7th, to send the message across the country that Republicans in New York, we're in a great position.
We will win.
We need to hold them in court.
But that's right, Steve.
I mean, they have no shot on the issues.
Not only is this illegal immigration crisis spreading all over the state, you've now got rapes, murders from illegal immigrants, people flooding in the northern border into New York by the thousands.
They've had more encounters, Steve, on the border along upstate New York into Vermont and New Hampshire, called the Swanton sector of the border.
They've had more apprehensions on the border in the last six months than 11 years combined.
And those are numbers from Joe Biden's Department of Homeland Security they put out.
We have no idea what's slipping in.
I've seen videos of hundreds of illegals running across farmers' property along the border.
They fly into Montreal, the cartels bring them down, they slip them across the woods, they get them in a van, they get them into New York City within three and a half, four hours.
It's insane.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Unbelievable.
Alex, how do people, we want to follow this suit because as so goes this suit, so goes New York State in New York City, and this is massive for us, particularly those House seats up there, the Congressional seats.
But I think right now, I think Trump can win New York.
I think New York's- Hold up.
But we got to stop the mail-in ballots.
They know how to rig the system.
That's got to be stopped.
How do we follow this?
Where do we go on social media?
How do we follow you to follow this?
alex degrasse ▲ ● ▼
So Steve, real quick, yeah, public polling has him only down by about 10 points within the margin.
So that's Democrat public polling has President Trump down 13, which we feel good about.
That means he's down 7, and we can make that up, obviously, easily.
So you can follow me at Degrass81.
You can read about the lawsuit on my boss, Congressman Stefanik's pages, Adelie Stefanik.
We're going to have major updates.
And if you want to help us fund this thing, we're going to need grassroots patrons because we're up against the entire state apparatus and their unlimited taxpayer funding.
You go to GOPbattlegroundfund.com.
Take a look.
Thank you so much, Steve, and to the posse.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Thank you.
And Stefanik's also going to be overall in charge of the messaging and I think the timing of this impeachment.
And she's all about quick march.
She's about getting it done and getting it done fast.
Okay, we got a lot going on.
I think we had Joe Allen.
He may have had to bounce.
He's going out to give a speech out into the hinterland.
We've got a lot to go through.
Tons happening on Capitol Hill.
Tons happening throughout the nation.
President Trump lights it up in Iowa today, where he's already way ahead, as he said.
Short commercial break.
unidentified
Back in the warm in just a moment.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
The House right now should re- Massey and these guys should convene.
Judiciary should convene immediately.
And start working on the charges of perjury of the Attorney General of the United States.
He sits there and lies to you.
Bald face lies.
Bald face.
That we should see some action.
Action, action, action.
McCarthy's putting this thing.
There's going to be some cuts in the CR.
But we're going to attach the big trinket, the big toy, H.R.
2, which is fine.
unidentified
H.R.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
2 is good.
I like it.
But they're breaking every law in the books right now to get people up here.
More laws are not going to stop him.
We have some pretty good laws.
The book's not enforcing those.
They're dragging people up here.
Nobody can stop.
Defund him!
That's the only way he's going to do it.
Get him by the throat and cut the money.
Oh, and he's going to get a commission on the debt.
Go to Birchgold right now.
Get the fourth installment of the End of the Dollar Empire.
You know why?
You're going to call McCarthy and say, hey, we don't need a commission.
I've read the Birchgold Installments.
You don't need, I can do, I do the debt trap.
Installment three.
I got it.
I understand it.
You get, take five trillion cash in and you spend seven trillion.
Hang on for a second.
Let me think about that.
That's two trillion a year we're putting onto the national debt that we're already at the point of no return.
I don't need a commission to take two years and have some white papers.
This is another ploy, just like the impeachment.
They want to give you shiny toys, shiny toys, because they think you're morons.
You're not morons.
Go to Birchgold right now.
Go there, talk to Philip Patrick, and just ask the question, why are the BRICS nations buying gold, the central banks, at record rates?
And our Federal Reserve, besides printing money, printing money, What they're doing is the central bank digital currency.
Just ask them and think about the answer.
Think about the answer when they give it to you.
I got Joe Allen back from the airport quickly.
Let's play the cold open.
Big news today from Elon Musk.
We told you this was going to happen.
I hate to say it, you know, when I say I told you so, but we told you so.
Let's play it.
unidentified
Elon Musk's brain chip startup Neuralink says it has received approval to begin recruiting patients for its first human trial.
An independent review board has given the green light for the company to seek people with paralysis to test its experimental device in a six-year study.
The study will use a robot to surgically place a brain-computer interface, or BCI, implant in a region of the brain that controls the intention to move.
elon musk ▲ ● ▼
The overarching goal of Neuralink is to create ultimately a whole-brain interface.
A generalized input-output device that in the long term literally could interface with every aspect of your brain.
I'll talk a little bit about a long-term goal.
It's going to sound a little esoteric, but it was actually my prime motivation.
What do we do about AI?
What do we do about Artificial general intelligence.
If we have digital superintelligence that's, you know, just much smarter than any human, how do we mitigate that risk?
unidentified
It's spooky.
It's spooky.
2030s is when the merge happens.
So we've got Neuralink coming and, you know, maybe other systems like that.
And what does it mean once you actually are kind of merging with an intelligence?
elon musk ▲ ● ▼
It's not clear to me that the Neuralink will be ready before AGI.
I think AGI is probably going to happen first.
The reason for Neuralink, although initially it will be very helpful to people who have brain or spine injuries and ultimately to improve the bandwidth between The cortex and your AI, the AI version of yourself.
And if ultimately hundreds of millions or billions of people get a high bandwidth interface to their digital tertiary self, their AI self effectively, then that seems like that probably leads to a better future for humanity.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
That probably leads to a better future.
This guy's deciding your future.
You feel good about that?
By the way, the engine room is blowing me up.
Before I bring Joe in, real quickly, call Thomas Massey.
Massey can redeem himself with how many screw-ups he's had on the budget and the rules.
He can redeem himself.
He's a smart guy.
Very smart guy.
MIT grad.
202-225-3121.
Call Congressman Massey of the great Commonwealth of Kentucky.
And tell him, brother, bring the perjury charge.
We have your back.
We have your back.
You might want to call Jim Jordan, too, and say, what are you being so nice?
Get an edge.
Give me some edge like Spartz.
Give me some edge like Gates.
Give me an edge like Van Drew.
Give me an edge like Massey.
We need an edge.
Call Tom Massey's office now and tell him we have your back.
Let's drop the perjury charges immediately about Merrick Garland.
Let's bring some criminal charges on him for perjury, for lying to Congress to your face.
We gotta start rolling these guys up.
Let's start with Merrick Garland.
No need to impeach him.
Let's charge him with some crimes.
Because he's a criminal.
Look what he's done to this country.
Joe Allen, that's amazing.
You said it years ago.
Elon Musk, FDA.
Now they're looking for humans.
Of course, it's all going to be paraplegics or people that are horribly damaged because that's what they're going to try to sell this.
It's very simple.
They want to have a merger of a human and a computer.
The silicon chip in a brain.
This is what they're trying to do.
That, by the way, note to self, take number two pencil out and write this down, that is not a homo sapien.
That is homo sapien 2.0.
That is part of the singularity.
Joe Allen.
joe allen ▲ ● ▼
Yes, Steve, we've been talking about this forever.
It is rolling forward.
The most important part is Elon Musk's grand vision for this.
People oftentimes have hit me with, he just wants to make the lame walk, he wants to make the blind see, as if he were Jesus Christ himself.
But what we hear there, he very clearly said, perhaps in a bit of a mumble, that his vision of the future is human beings merging their minds with artificial intelligence systems.
So he described that as a tertiary self or a digital AI self.
What he means is that human beings will have their own sort of AI guardian angel that they will be able to communicate with via his Neuralink system.
It's important to note that BlackRock Neurotech has already hit the 50 patient mark, so they already have effective brain computer interfaces in people's heads, along with the brain computer interface company Synchron.
The seventh chapter of my book, Steve, as you know, is dedicated to Elon Musk in the light of Yuval Noah Harari.
It looks at his motivations.
It looks at the ideology behind these experiments on human vegetables that he sees as being the path forward.
You heard him say it right there.
Perhaps hundreds of millions or billions of people connected to this system would keep the AI under control.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
Joe, we've got to bounce.
Six o'clock, Natalie's going to be here.
The show's on fire.
They're going to calm me down for a little while.
I want to thank Real America's Voice.
We had the Trump speech and we went to this great merry-go-round that blew most of the breaks.
Fantastic job, Denver.
Appreciate it.
Joe, real quickly, where did they get you on social media, the book, and where are you going to go speak?
joe allen ▲ ● ▼
I'll be at Bard's Fest outside of Lexington, Kentucky, and then I will be at an undisclosed location at a private meeting.
You can find the links to the book at the top of my social media, at J-O-E-B-O-T-X-Y-Z, and my website, joebot.xyz.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼
The Actions in Kentucky, 202-225-3121.
Call Tom Massey right now.
Tell him he got his back.
▲
Export Selection