Dec. 20, 2023 - Bannon's War Room
47:56
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
Governor, thanks for joining us. | |
| So Ambassador Haley's in Iowa today, where the latest CBS News poll finds her at 13% in third place there. | ||
| What part of her message is not resonating with voters in that crucial state, even as some polls indicate she's surging in New Hampshire, your state? | ||
| Yeah, sure. | ||
| So understand the messages are always going to be a little bit different, a little bit tailored to each state. | ||
| With the Live Free or Die state, I think she has a great decentralizing government message that translates here. | ||
| I think it's just a matter of kind of putting that message on the ground there. | ||
| Everybody, all the Republicans and I want government out of their lives. | ||
| They all want somebody who's going to be fiscally responsible and secure the border. | ||
| These are the policies that we all agree on. | ||
| Now, getting it done is really the difference maker. | ||
| Who has that record of experience? | ||
| So I think if she just spends more time in Iowa, she's going to get a lot of the similar results that she's got. | ||
| She's gotten here. | ||
| And again, there's four or five weeks to go. | ||
| People say that's not a lot of time. | ||
| It's actually a ton of time. | ||
| Poll numbers can move 10, 20 points in these last four or five weeks, and I have no doubt she's the only one with momentum in the last couple weeks and the only one that's going to carry it right until January 23rd. | ||
| Well, let's talk about this latest poll out in New Hampshire, which finds Trump still in first place, 44%. | ||
| Haley's at 29%. | ||
| That's a big bump for her. | ||
| Ron DeSantis is at 11%. | ||
| Chris Christie at 10%. | ||
| Everyone else in single digits. | ||
| Do you think somebody needs to drop out before New Hampshire primary takes place for Nikki Haley to make up those 15 points in order to win the state? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I don't think it has to happen, and I think what you're going to see is the voters are going to come around Nikki anyways. | |
| Chris Christie's voters have one mission, right? | ||
| To make sure Trump's not the candidate, because that's Chris's mission. | ||
| But now it's clear, unfortunately, Chris is a great candidate, a great guy, a great governor, but that's not the path. | ||
| So they're all going to naturally come this way. | ||
| DeSantis' voters, even some of the Trump voters, are now realizing, well, Trump's not inevitable. | ||
| We have a choice, and it's really a binary choice. | ||
| So I think, naturally, she's going to get enough of a bump with the voters, and maybe, ultimately, you know, someone chooses to drop out. | ||
| That's really their choice. | ||
| I'm not going to force anyone to drop out. | ||
| I can't do that, of course. | ||
| I think the voters are going to kind of make that statement and make it clear where their support's going in those polls, and then we'll see what comes from that. | ||
| And Murdoch News You know, TV for stupid people. | ||
| Have we talked about Murdoch News? | ||
| Remember, for a year and a half, you had DeSantis. | ||
| Then you had Youngkin. | ||
| Now you got Nikki. | ||
| And they put out a poll today. | ||
| You know, the Wall Street Journal had a poll the other day. | ||
| She's beating Biden. | ||
| A poll today in CBS. | ||
|
unidentified
|
She's closing out. | |
| She's got momentum. | ||
|
unidentified
|
They're going to be all over that. | |
| You know what they're trying to do? | ||
| I'm gonna give you some inside base for you. | ||
| You know what they're trying to do? | ||
|
unidentified
|
700 million dollars. | |
| It'll be a billion dollars. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Not one penny of that spent on voter integrity. | |
| Or securing the election. | ||
| All for raising their profile. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And Ron and these fat cats running around these debates. | |
| Were the debates the biggest waste of time you've ever seen? | ||
|
unidentified
|
You know what the purpose is? | |
| Nikki Haley can't beat- Nikki Haley not gonna beat Trump! | ||
| But she is gonna consolidate that Never Trump vote. | ||
| And you wait. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You wait. | |
| Mark my words. | ||
|
unidentified
|
They're gonna make a big move while Nikki's gotta be the Vice President. | |
| Yeah, she gotta be the Vice President. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That- You don't- You don't love Nikki? | |
| Neocon Nikki? | ||
| Neoliberal Neocon Nikki? | ||
| You don't love her? | ||
| She's ambitious as Lucifer. | ||
| You're gonna see, they're gonna come on, jam it up. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You watch. | |
| Mark my words. | ||
| We're gonna have to stop that. | ||
| That Viper over there, that'd be worse than Judas Pence in the West Wing, wouldn't it? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Audience members cheer. | |
| You're not fans of Nikki? | ||
| You're not fans of Nikki as VP? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No! | |
| Tucker! | ||
| Oh my lord, this is not PG rated. | ||
| PG rated. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh Lord have mercy. | |
| Hey, Republican National Committee, this is the kind of fight you need right here, okay? | ||
| These are fighters. | ||
| No time for happy talk! | ||
| No time for games! | ||
| President Trump always says no games. | ||
| No time for games! | ||
| We don't have time for it! | ||
|
unidentified
|
Someone asked me, would you vote for Trump if he chose Nikki as VP? | |
| Would you guys vote for Trump? | ||
|
unidentified
|
That's the question that I asked you specifically. | |
| Well, I would not only not vote for that ticket, I would advocate against it as strongly as I could. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Wow. | |
| Wow. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| That's just poison. | ||
| I mean, here's someone who's actively opposed to the interests of the country I grew up in, who endorsed the BLM riots, and who is I wanna thank the great team. | ||
| I gotta learn how to use the technology. | ||
| in the darkest, most, speaking of nihilist, nihilistic way, and has no real popular support, is a creature of the oligarchs. | ||
| So yeah, that would be reason to oppose the ticket. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I want to thank the great team. | |
| I got to learn to use the technology. | ||
| I want to thank the great team in Memphis, Logan House and the team for putting this together. | ||
| Tuesday, 19 December, Year of the Lord 2023. | ||
| I'm a little slow on the uptake after the amazing live event we had at AmFest with all the great support of Real America's Voice, Lyndale TV, the Memphis Control Center, the Denver Control Center, all of it. | ||
| Right there you saw a montage of Nikki Haley. | ||
| And of course, she's a complete creation of the oligarchs, as Tucker says. | ||
| You know, Rahim, you did the analysis. | ||
| First, I want to talk about Tucker, and then I'll go back to your analysis. | ||
| I haven't had time because there's so much going on, and I saw the Tim Pool thing, and it resonated. | ||
| But man, when I think about it, given Tucker supported President Trump, and given his place in the MAGA hierarchy, That is about as brutal as you can get. | ||
| He said, I would actively work against it if he was to pick her. | ||
| I think it shows the severity and I think the folks around him have got to start to get their minds focused. | ||
| They should not be criticizing people that are talking about policies, people talking about just coming off of Trump's speeches. | ||
| About people that might be in the administration, the 3,000 people we need to get up to speed, these organizations that are putting their heart and soul in this. | ||
| I think it'd be well put because the people around, there's a lot of basically RNC-type apparatchiks that are around President Trump still. | ||
| That's just a matter of fact. | ||
| And they better take that warning from Tucker Carlson quite seriously. | ||
| Rahim Ghassan, your thoughts? | ||
| Yeah, I think you really have to think about it across a multitude of ways. | ||
| Obviously the discouragement that it would cause amongst the base. | ||
| I think that the comments that were made up on that stage are comments that reflect how a lot of people feel. | ||
| A lot of people would feel like actually Nikki Haley would represent every single day of the next government would represent a negation of America first, not simply just kind of not adding to it, but actually subtracting from it on a day-to-day basis. | ||
| And that is something, you know, with which people are not willing to put up with and shouldn't be willing to put up with, especially after you saw so many of those people infiltrate, actively infiltrate and disturb the last Trump administration. | ||
| It is a matter of fact that there will still be those people lurking around. | ||
| We can't fool ourselves into believing that every Republican that's working in Washington, D.C. | ||
| and seeking a job in the next Trump administration is gonna do so with good intentions. | ||
| But you don't need to shoot yourself in the foot by appointing somebody like Nikki Haley, the Vice President. | ||
| The other ways that you have to think about it is this. | ||
| A lot of people, when they hear Nikki Haley, the first thing they think of, synonymous with Nikki Haley, apart from her actual name, Nimrata, is neoconservative. | ||
| Neocon Nikki, right? | ||
| But it's not just that. | ||
| That's not the only downside to Nikki Haley. | ||
| Nikki Haley has been out there campaigning for mass censorship of Americans speaking online, and has been out there campaigning for corporate control of America's immigration policies. | ||
| Now, to come back to something we were talking about in the last hour, Corporate America already has control over American immigration policies, and look how it's working out. | ||
| The answer to the question how Donald Trump should react to this, the new big lie, right, which is the poisoning of the blood commentary by the corporate media, is to double and triple down on it, which is to say Actually, we used to go out there and say, secure the border. | ||
| We're actually now out here saying, what border? | ||
| The border has actually been demolished. | ||
| You don't have to build a wall anymore. | ||
| You actually have to build a border from scratch again, Steve. | ||
| Go ahead, Rahim. | ||
| Bye. | ||
| Yeah, look, the Nikki Haley thing is relatively self-evident to people. | ||
| I think at this point in time, it should be self-evident to them. | ||
| It should also be evident that Donald Trump is going to experience the sorts of lies, the big lies that they've been telling about him for several years now, maybe just nearing on a decade. | ||
| Every month, there'll be a new one, by the way. | ||
| And this is just the latest. | ||
| And that's why, by the way, I'll use the airtime here. | ||
| To plug the National Pulse because, and that's why I've taken the time out to start building this thing that we're doing, these editorials now every couple of days, and whether it is diving into that polling, that CBS YouGov polling that we saw come out this weekend, whether it's what you see up there right now about the poison the blood comments, we have another one coming out tomorrow about John Fetterman and how he is actually | ||
| Quite well representing America First initiatives in Pennsylvania, so it regards the steel sale to Japan. | ||
| We actually have a number of these planned for over the course of the next few weeks and months, and if people want to be a part of that, they can go to TheNationalPulse.com, you can sign up, you can support us, because we're a small team, and we're doing our best to make sure that these things, not just Resonate, but they actually make an impact. | ||
| And I think you've seen from what J.D. | ||
| Vance said today, you know, directly channeling the editorial that I wrote just a couple of days ago. | ||
| This is having a massive impact. | ||
| I'm from the United Kingdom. | ||
| Britain has always punched above its weight and the National Oppulse does the same thing. | ||
| Steve. | ||
| News here, just came across the wire, Kyle Chaney and Politico, I think it is, is that Colorado Supreme Court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the presidency and therefore will not be on the Colorado ballot. | ||
| I want to read this. | ||
| In this appeal from a district court proceeding under the Colorado Election Code, the Supreme Court considers whether former President Donald J. Trump may appear in the Colorado Republican presidential primary ballot in 2024. | ||
| Majority of the court holds that President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of the presidency under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution because he is disqualified Uh, it would be a wrongful act under the election code for the Colorado secretary of state to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot. | ||
| The court stays its ruling until four January, 2024 subject to any further appellate proceedings. | ||
| People have to understand the ballots for the primary get printed. | ||
| I think on the sixth in, um, in, uh, in Colorado, we're going to track down Mike Davis and, uh, maybe a couple of other people and redo our program here. | ||
| You get on this. | ||
| Remember, they won at the district court level, but it was appealed. | ||
| It was appealed by the groups that brought it. | ||
| That was overturned, it looks like, in Colorado, and they have declared that President Trump, the Colorado Supreme Court has, let me just get this right, has ruled that The Colorado Supreme Court holds that Donald J. Trump is disqualified from holding the office of the presidency. | ||
| That's where we have it right there. | ||
| We put it up on the screen. | ||
| Breaking news right here. | ||
| Just came across the wire. | ||
| Like I said, we're going to track down Mike Davis and maybe a couple, three of the other lawyers, Boris and others, that are working on this. | ||
| That's a reverse on appeal. | ||
| Remember, we won the first one. | ||
| Your thoughts on this, Rahim? | ||
| You've covered this pretty closely also. | ||
| Your thoughts on this? | ||
| Particularly given the big push for Nikki Haley and others, this is just going to throw gasoline on the fire. | ||
| Well, yeah, I'm just reading through it as well, Steve, right now. | ||
| The mechanics of this should be quite obvious to people. | ||
| There was always going to be some court, there was always going to be some group of people that tried to successfully ram this through. | ||
| Obviously we're going to see appeals against this. | ||
| It may and will go far higher and you will end up in a situation where two sets of ballots have to be printed in advance so that the state is ready to be able to use Either or, when it comes to that date. | ||
| But I think we both know, I mean, we've spoken about this before, we've spoken to the same people about this before, that the conflation of the phrase, Officer of the United States, as it is stipulated in the 14th Amendment, actually has no application to the President of the United States. | ||
| And if it does, by the way, have application to the President of the United States, then there are a lot of other officers of the United States in the country's history that can be pulled up on different things here. So this will obviously be looking into who is on that Colorado Supreme Court and how this decision has been made, but as you say, it is certainly significant breaking news this afternoon. And it's going to be driven by all the opponents. | ||
| You're going to see the Sanunas, everybody all over it. | ||
| We're obviously going to get in front of this. | ||
| Two things. | ||
| Let's go back to the Nikki Haley. | ||
| I want to talk about the CBS poll. | ||
| You did an amazing job deconstructing this on Sunday morning as soon as you got it. | ||
| I want our audience to understand a brush fire poll and what it does and kind of throw it out into the media. | ||
| This is one that started with momentum, only 15 points behind Trump. | ||
| Of course, as you told me on Sunday, they kept changing even the basic mathematics of the poll. | ||
| Tell me about that. | ||
| Yeah, so I think the first thing we discussed on Sunday when talking about this is how probably the biggest story over the weekend wasn't featured on the Sunday morning shows. | ||
| They were all kind of leading with this CBS YouGov poll. | ||
| The biggest story, I think, and I thought in the GOP primary from over the weekend, was the fact that Geoff Rowe, the head of Never Back Down, backed out. | ||
| The long-standing DeSantis and Youngkin and Adam Laxalt advisor packing it in is a pretty big deal. | ||
| But, you know, no mention of that. | ||
| In fact, it was all dominated by the CBS YouGov poll. | ||
| So that's your first clue. | ||
| They're ramming this data down your throat. | ||
| Let's go and have a look at the crosstabs. | ||
| So loading the crosstabs initially, I start to look. | ||
| I always look for several things. | ||
| If you're in this industry, you know as well as I do, Steve, that you look for several things. | ||
| You look for the sample size, you look at the margin of error, and you look at the weighting. | ||
| Immediately it struck me that the sample size was not big enough to make any serious takeaways from this poll. | ||
| Advertised sample size was something along the lines of 900. | ||
| When you actually got to the question whether or not people would want to vote for Nikki Haley, the sample size halved and they didn't advertise that fact. | ||
| Which is, by the way, a really weird thing to do in polling. | ||
| There's all sorts of tricks that you can deploy in polling, but you rarely ever see a sample size change within the same poll. | ||
| So some, what I say, what I always say, jiggery-pokery going on there for sure by CBS and YouGov. | ||
| The other part of it that stood out, however, there are several elements of that poll that weren't represented on the news as they started to report just the parts that they wanted For instance, I'll give you an example. | ||
| The sample size of independents and self-identified moderates was way out of whack from what you would usually see. | ||
| had actually over sampled uh independence and self-identified moderates in that poll which which led to a significant shift in not just the Nikki Haley numbers but also other questions that they had asked in that poll uh questions related to abortion questions related to um other policy areas questions related to immigration so on and so forth you saw them all shift from the last cbs you gov poll which i which i did a side-by-side comparison of and just to give the audience an understanding of what it means to do a side-by-side | ||
| comparison of cross tabs in a poll like this well each of those documents is about 130 pages long and and and each page is just a swathe of percentage points and numbers across the page so So there I am, you know, on a Sunday morning, going through about 260 pages of data, and passing that down into this article that we got up, we got up in pretty good time, pretty short order. | ||
| The other interesting thing about that poll that I found was that they The way that they had reported it, the way that they had kind of tried to present it to people as, oh, this is Nikki momentum, and it's very clear that she's stealing votes away from Donald Trump. | ||
| Actually, Donald Trump didn't lose numbers in that poll. | ||
| The numbers were coming from Don't Knows, Vivek, Christie, DeSantis and so forth. | ||
| And even their numbers showed that Trump's decided voter base was really not shifting. | ||
| It's pretty much stuck there. | ||
| It's pretty much there to stay. | ||
| And so even if you accept the premise that Nikki Haley has momentum in New Hampshire, you have to therefore also accept the other premise found in that same poll. | ||
| That she has actually a pretty low ceiling, Steve. | ||
| Let me play. | ||
| I want to do this quickly. | ||
| If we can play the cut from Federman, I want to talk about neoliberal Nikkei. | ||
| This is going to be a massive issue. | ||
| We've been advocating this from the beginning. | ||
| Peter Navarro is going to join us tomorrow to talk about it. | ||
| Federman, this is about the U.S. | ||
| steel takeover by Nippon Steel, the largest steel company in Japan. | ||
| Let's play Federman and I'm going to get Raheem's thoughts on neoliberal Nikkei. | ||
|
unidentified
|
About the proposed sale of U.S. | |
| steel, which is headquartered in Pittsburgh, to Japan's largest steel maker. | ||
| Do you think that the deal should be blocked? | ||
| Do you think that selling U.S. | ||
| steel to Japan, a Japanese company, poses a risk to the national security of the United States? | ||
| Yeah, no, I'm actually outraged by it. | ||
| It absolutely is. | ||
| I live across the street from the mill, and I used to have a really great relationship with the management. | ||
| In fact, they would even, you know, over any simple kind of press release or anything, they would give me a heads up, and they never mentioned to me at all. | ||
| And of course, they never checked in with the union. | ||
| So that, to me, that tells two things. | ||
| uh... that they don't have to care what happens to the union and into uh... with my reputation and my uh... uh... my uh... | ||
| uh... reputation uh... and you know so from my perspective uh... there must be one of two things that they don't ever have to care about us much longer and that they must have a very very gold uh... kind of parachute here as well uh... let's go back okay uh... | ||
| Fetterman right there. He's been pretty vocal about that Of course, U.S. | ||
| Steel's in Pittsburgh, once one of the greatest, the biggest company in the world now. | ||
| The acquisition size, $14 billion, so it's not as large, but it's the central. | ||
| They had a merger between Cleveland Cliffs, the number three producer, and the two producers, Steel, but that was kind of waved off by the investors. | ||
| Rahim, the politics of this, she's a neoliberal. | ||
| She hasn't really supported populist economic policies. | ||
| You've already had JD Vance come out, Josh Hawley has come out, Marco Rubio have come out. | ||
| They've already sent a letter questioning this. | ||
| They want to slow this thing down and really look at it. | ||
| Your thoughts about the politics of it with neoliberal neocon Nikki? | ||
| Well firstly, you know, I'll say and do a little bit of an advertisement again, the national pulse is Issuing editorials now is the next step in our work in representing the news correctly and fairly and also driving the agenda. | ||
| I think there is a serious gap in detailed analysis like this, not necessarily long analysis by the way, we don't believe in that and in wasting people's time like that, but quick but detailed analysis on things like that and one of the ones that we're going to be reporting on over the next 24 hours is, you know, quite frankly, that John Fetterman, for all his problems, for all of the silliness we saw over the course of his campaign, | ||
| appears to be representing Pennsylvania residents far better than somebody like Dr. Oz would have done, especially when it comes to an issue like this. You've got to be able to accept, and you taught me this in a big way, Steve, when your opponents are flexing, when they're showing talent, when they're showing verve, when they're showing capability, and when they're out maneuvering you. | ||
| And Barack Obama was very good at this. | ||
| I remember listening to you back in the day on the old radio show talking about how Obama sidestepping and outmaneuvering republicans in Washington DC on a day-to-day basis. | ||
| And as far as sort of a left-leaning, you know, you may say, you may say, I don't think he even classes himself as a quote-unquote progressive, but certainly a left-leaning, America first philosophy, you know, is, exists, as far as it exists. | ||
| Then John Fetterman, you know, actually is showing quite a lot of verve there. | ||
| He's at least leading the way for his party to take it away from foreign interest, to take it away from, you know, flying Palestinian flags in the streets and actually to representing the interests of the American worker. | ||
| And I think John Fetterman, not in an electoral sense, I don't mean it when I say this, but John Fetterman, at least in a philosophical sense and in an attraction to the policies that he's representing sense, is far more of an assailant to a right-leaning America First movement than somebody like Joe Biden. | ||
| And frankly, it makes Nikki Haley look further to the left than him. | ||
| Uh, you're going to have, uh, your, uh, your guy Upton is doing a big piece. | ||
| It's going to break on National Pulse tomorrow to analyze all this is former treasury over Trump's treasury department. | ||
| Uh, can we get him on tomorrow morning? | ||
| I want to book him. | ||
| I want to book him now on air. | ||
| Can we get Upton on? | ||
| Done. | ||
| Consider it done. | ||
| Rahim, where do people go to get National Pulse? | ||
| You're getting the important stories and you're doing the type of contextualization that only some of the elite left-wing sites are doing. | ||
| Nobody else on the right's doing it. | ||
| So where do folks go? | ||
| Yeah, that's what we're trying to do is outmaneuver them because they've got all of this cash, all the CNN billions and the Atlantic and all of these guys and we have, you know, a couple of us, right? | ||
| You know, this network, the Rav Posse and the War Room Posse. | ||
| And the National Pulse. | ||
| So you can go to thenationalpulse.com forward slash war room. | ||
| I urge you all to sign up. | ||
| Your first month is free. | ||
| So if you don't like it, just cancel it. | ||
| But I think you'll like it. | ||
| I know you're going to like it. | ||
| What we're building over there is an intellectual machine that can actually drive this movement forward. | ||
| And you are part of that machine. | ||
| You are a critical part of that machine. | ||
| Because guess what? | ||
| No corporate money, no billionaire money, no donor money. | ||
| It's all from people who sign up at thenationalpulse.com. | ||
| We live or die based on whether or not you care enough about that. | ||
| So we're taking the risk. | ||
| Take the journey with us. | ||
| TheNationalPulse.com forward slash Wharram. | ||
| And now I've got to go get this Colorado story up. | ||
| Okay, perfect. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Just an announcement, Mike Davis is going to join us by a phoner, trying to get Boris by a phoner. | ||
| We've got a lot of great stories and analysis we're going to break in the next half hour. | ||
| We might have to juggle some stuff around, but we're going to get it all done. | ||
| We're going to take a short break. | ||
| Now we're going to get into the U.S. | ||
| deal, what is populist economics. | ||
| One thing I can tell you That we oppose is the flooding of fiscal irresponsibility. | ||
| Fiscal irresponsibility, that's the legislature and the executive branch passing and spending, doing these massive Keynesian infusions, named after John Maynard Keynes. | ||
| The massive government intervention, these massive spending bills, the massive deficits, which just destroy the dollar even more. | ||
| And the fiat currency pumped in by the Federal Reserve, our central bank, Which has been one of the issues in this republic from its foundings. | ||
| The way you encounter that in your own personal life is understand, you have to understand, nobody's going to do it for you, only you, is precious metals, particularly gold, why it's been a hedge. | ||
| In times of turbulence for mankind for 5,000 years of recorded history. | ||
| Go to the team at Birchgold. | ||
| Birchgold.com slash Bannon to get the end of the dollar empire to talk to Philip Patrick and the team. | ||
| Do it today. | ||
| You will not regret it. | ||
| You got to understand it. | ||
| Then maybe get a pot of Warpath coffee, sit down, have a cup and do some thinking. | ||
| Think on your own. | ||
| You're free men and women. | ||
| Short break. | ||
| break. Mike Davis on the other side. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, um, is now was fighting to be able to be on that primary ballot. | |
| The Colorado Supreme Court now issuing a 200-something page opinion that we've just got. | ||
| And we're going to go back to Christy Greenberg and Hugo Lowell. | ||
| I know, guys, you haven't had a chance to look at it. | ||
| We're looking at it right now. | ||
| It's 217 pages. | ||
| But Christy, I want to start with you on this particular issue. | ||
| This is not the first state. | ||
| That there's been an attempt to be able to disqualify Trump being able to be on the ballot. | ||
| But what's intriguing about it is that it's now being done in a way where the judicial system is having a say in terms of whether or not somebody can be on a ballot. | ||
| Your thoughts about what we're hearing coming out of Colorado at this time? | ||
| Well, it is an interesting decision because the Colorado District Judge, Sarah Wallace, last month, when she made her decision, she had a really puzzling decision where she found, based on the evidence, that Trump had engaged in insurrection, but essentially said, well, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, it doesn't apply to presidents. | ||
| He's not an officer such that it applies to him, which was a really odd result. | ||
| So when that was appealed, I think a lot of people had been scratching their heads and thought the appeal was appropriate. | ||
| And, you know, I haven't read the basis of this, but it sounds like at least the Colorado Supreme Court said no, actually. | ||
| If he engaged in insurrection, yes, he is an officer and the 14th Amendment would apply to him. | ||
| It would be a perverse result otherwise to have it applied to members of Congress and others in lower elected officials and not to the President of the United States. | ||
| So it sounds like Colorado Supreme Court got it right in finding that this should apply to the President and presumably determines that the factual findings of the District Court in finding that he engaged in the insurrection were upheld. | ||
| So it is a result that is Interesting. | ||
| It is a result that seems like the right result. | ||
| The big question will be whether or not it holds, because this is surely going to the U.S. | ||
| Supreme Court, and I have a lot less confidence that the U.S. | ||
| Supreme Court will decide that Donald Trump should be disqualified from the ballot, given that conservative majority on that court. | ||
| Because only the trial court judge gets to see the witnesses as they testify, assesses their demeanor, and reaches factual findings. | ||
| So, the fact that the trial court judge, in the estimation of the Colorado Supreme Court, got the legal conclusion wrong, and the Colorado Supreme Court basically reviewed that de novo from jump, Um, and reached a different conclusion. | ||
| Um, that that is that's one thing. | ||
| But the fact that we have these factual findings from a trial court should frankly continue to win the day up through the appellate court system up to and including the Supreme Court. | ||
| Because as long as those factual findings are supported by evidence of record and they were, you know, this is gonna be a real danger zone now moving forward for Donald Trump. | ||
| So OK, welcome back. | ||
| Let's go to we have Mike Davis by phone joins us from Colorado. | ||
| Mike, you've been there from the beginning. | ||
| You put the legal team together. | ||
| Tell me you've warned us about this, but now it's hit. | ||
| Talk to us about it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, it was predictable and predicted you had four partisan Democrat activists in robes in a four to three decision. | |
| Simply take President Trump off the ballot in Colorado and they ignored the facts. | ||
| Including the fact that there was not an insurrection on January 6th. | ||
| It was a protest, a lawful protest, permitted by the National Park Service that got out of control and turned into a riot. | ||
| How many insurrectionists go unarmed into a nation's capital, get to the Senate floor, take selfies, walk through velvet ropes, and don't burn down the damn place, right? | ||
| And follow police direction. | ||
| So they ignored the facts. | ||
| They ignored the law including section 3 of the 14th amendment and they ignored 150 plus years of controlling precedent and that controlling precedent is this if you want to disqualify An officeholder under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment passed out after the Civil War to chase Confederate insurrectionists out of office. | ||
| Congress has to pass a federal criminal statute for insurrection or rebellion, which Congress did in 1870. | ||
| It's stolen the books. | ||
| You have to charge that official with insurrection or rebellion under this federal criminal statute. | ||
| You have to have a grand jury indictment. | ||
| You have to have the prosecutor present evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. | ||
| The jury has to find them guilty. | ||
| The judge has to convict. | ||
| That conviction has to be upheld on appeal. | ||
| That's the only way you can disqualify under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. | ||
| And so for the first time in American history, these four partisan Democrat activist judges on the Colorado Supreme Court said, you know, we're going to let four judges decide in Colorado instead of the millions of people in Colorado We're going to have four liberal judges in Colorado decide the next presidential election. | ||
| This is an abomination. | ||
| These are republic-ending tactics. | ||
| By these Democrat prosecutors and these Democrat judges. | ||
| And sure, Trump's not going to win Colorado. | ||
| It's a deep blue state since they legalized weed and went to all-mail ballots. | ||
| But now Democrats are going to use this precedent like we predicted all along, Steve. | ||
| They're going to use this precedent. | ||
| They're going to go back to these other swing states and say, look, we have this precedent in Colorado. | ||
| This should be Is that where it goes next? | ||
| Do you have to go to a federal district or you go right to the Supreme Court on this? | ||
| and you guys should disqualify Trump for insurrection under, based upon this Colorado precedent. | ||
| The US Supreme Court needs to put on its big boy pants. | ||
| They need to take this case and they need to reverse this. | ||
| This is an abomination. | ||
| Is that where it goes next? | ||
| Do you have to go to a federal district or your right to the Supreme Court on this? | ||
| What's the process? | ||
|
unidentified
|
So this is a Colorado election challenge. | |
| It goes from that Democrats, Judge Sarah Wallace, remember we talked about that, she was biased. | ||
| She donated to an anti-Trump January 6th PAC in October after the Democrat governor named her as a judge in August. | ||
| Two months later, while she's waiting to take the bench in January, she donated to this anti-Trump January 6th, PAC 2 chased Republicans out of office. | ||
| She was clearly biased. | ||
| She clearly should have recused. | ||
| She didn't. | ||
| So she set this up for the Colorado Supreme Court. | ||
| She said that she found that there was somehow an insurrection on January 6th, even though they were unarmed, right? | ||
| And then she said that the president is not an officer under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. | ||
| So it was very easy to tee this up for the seven Democrat appointees. | ||
| On the Colorado Supreme Court, seven of seven Democrat appointees, and so it was very easy for these four most radical Democrat partisans on the Colorado Supreme Court to say, you know what? | ||
| We're going to go with her factual finding that there was an insurrection, but we're going to reverse her legal finding that Section 3 does not apply. | ||
| We're going to ignore the precedent from 150 years ago that in order to disqualify, you have to have a federal criminal statute and the federal criminal conviction, and we're just going to take him off the ballot. | ||
| Now it goes. | ||
| From the Colorado Supreme Court, there's going to be probably an emergency cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States. | ||
| The Supreme Court does not have to take this case. | ||
| It has discretionary review. | ||
| But I don't know how the Supreme Court ignores this case. | ||
| Why do you say that? | ||
| Why do you believe the Supreme Court cannot ignore this case? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Because if these Democrats Partisan prosecutors and attorneys and judges and juries in these Democrat hellholes think that they get to decide this next election through their bogus impeachments, two bogus impeachments, their four bogus indictments for non-crimes, their bogus civil fraud lawsuit in New York to bankrupt Trump for the non-fraud of paying back sophisticated Wall Street banks, | |
| In full-on time, as agreed with interest, there are two illegal gag orders that you would do in China and the United States, and that'll backfire. | ||
| That's all. | ||
| Trump's now beating President Biden like a drum on November 5th, 2024. | ||
| If the Democrats think, okay, now our legal hellmare is to go to these Democrat judges and just take them off the ballot so the American people don't have a choice, these are Republic-ending tactics by the Democrats. | ||
| There is no way in hell this is going to fly with the American people. | ||
| And if the Supreme Court of the United States wants our country to devolve into a third-world Marxist hellhole, then they won't do a damn thing about this. | ||
| But if they actually want to use their lifetime tenure, their pay protection, and actually find their backbones and follow the law, including 150 years of controlling precedent on this point that Congress must pass a federal criminal statute to disqualify, if they're not going to do that, we're not going to have a country left. | ||
| I want to go to, so if the Supreme Court doesn't do it, is there any other way to get this reversed? | ||
| Given in Colorado, the Supreme Court, four to three, with the four Radical Democrat judges voting to remove Trump and said that Trump reversed the decision of the actual, the left-winger that held the trial. | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| And then what happens is Trump is off the ballot in Colorado. | ||
| Again, it's a blue state. | ||
| the people that brought it on appeal, the Supreme Court overturned it. | ||
| If the Supreme Court does not pick it up for any reason, is there any other resolution of this? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| And then what happens is Trump is off the ballot in Colorado. | ||
| Again, it's a blue state. | ||
| He's not going to win Colorado anyway. | ||
| But then you're going to see Minnesota and Michigan and New Hampshire and these other states take another crack at taking him off the ballot in these swing states. | ||
| And if they think that they're just going to take Trump off the ballot in key swing states and President Biden or Gavin Newsom or whoever the hell the Democrats run in 2024. If they think that they're just going to let that Democrat win by default, even though President Trump has the support of the American people, this is not going to fly. This is how this is how republics fall. | ||
| Uh, I hate to say this, but I mentioned this over a month ago about these topics, that even if it goes to Supreme Court, the pressure of the left on about recusing judges, I'm gonna have Mark Paglietta on tomorrow. | ||
| You know him quite well. | ||
| He was instrumental in the White House. | ||
| He was the White House Counsel for the Vice President at the time. | ||
| He was on the committee with me to select the Supreme Court nominees, and you worked very closely with that team, Mike. | ||
| There's pressure now about Justice Thomas recusing himself in these issues that are coming for the court on J6. | ||
| Do you feel confident that Roberts and these others will be able to take the pressure? | ||
| Because it's going to be enormous pressure to try to mold, even if it goes to the Supreme Court, to try to mold the court so they have a liberal majority or the pencil necks like Roberts to make the decisions here, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
There's no chance in hell that Justice Clarence Thomas should recuse from any of these cases. | |
| There is a presumption that Supreme Court justices do not recuse from cases. | ||
| Unlike the lower federal courts, Where recusal is easier because you can interchange judges. | ||
| You can bring in judges from all over the country. | ||
| You can't do that with the Supreme Court. | ||
| So there is a presumption that they do not recuse. | ||
| And why the hell should Justice Clarence Thomas have to recuse because of his wife's personal political views that she's held for her entire adult life? | ||
| She was a Republican activist long before she met Clarence Thomas. | ||
| She was a Republican activist long before Clarence Thomas went on the Supreme Court, and the Senate conforms to many ways knowing this. | ||
| So why the hell should he have to refuse? | ||
| And if it's the standard that these people need to refuse based upon their spouse, then why the hell is Jack Smith not refused as special counsel? | ||
| Because his wife is a Democrat partisan activist, an Obama supporter, a Biden supporter. | ||
| She donated to these political campaigns. | ||
| She produced a documentary for Michelle Obama. | ||
| If that's the standard, if your spouse's political views is now the new standard, there are a lot of judges and a lot of prosecutors who have to refuse. | ||
| This is nonsense by the left. | ||
| It's desperation. | ||
| It's part of the welfare campaign Republicans need to stand firm. | ||
| Davis, you've been all of this from the beginning. | ||
| How do people follow you on social media, and how do they get to Article 3 to learn more about your work? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Article3project.org. | |
| Article3project.org. | ||
| You can donate there. | ||
| At Article3project, at Article3project.getter.twitter.truth. | ||
| My personal is at MRDDMIA. | ||
| And this is why November 5th, 2024 is so crucial for this country. | ||
| It's make or break for America. | ||
| Mike Davis, thank you very much. | ||
| Honored to have you on here. | ||
| Thanks for changing up your schedule to jump on here. | ||
| I have Boris Epstein. | ||
| Boris is the senior lawyer that coordinates all of this for President Trump. | ||
| Boris, it just came in. | ||
| We've warned people that these radicals in Colorado, that this might be a possibility, even though we won at the district level against a radical. | ||
| Your thoughts, sir? | ||
| Steve, honored to be with you again. | ||
| Here's the bottom line. | ||
| This is very important. | ||
| The Supreme Court, these radicals in the Colorado Supreme Court, wrote up this long, long opinion and put out what they want to happen, which is their wish list to have President Trump off the ballot. | ||
| But then they said not to disrupt the status quo. | ||
| Their own decision has stayed until January 4th. | ||
| But if the president appeals to the United States Supreme Court, which, as we said in the statement last several minutes, will happen absolutely, then the state continues indefinitely until the Supreme Court rules. | ||
| Now, and very important to point out that in Colorado, January 5th is when ballots are printed. | ||
| So is the key passage there. | ||
| Hold it, hold it, hang on, hang on. | ||
| Ballots for the primary print, not for the general. | ||
| The primary ballots print on the 5th or 6th. | ||
| That's correct. | ||
| Therefore, to maintain the status quo pending any review by the U.S. | ||
| Supreme Court, we stay our ruling until January 4, 2024. | ||
| The day before the Secretary's deadline to certify the content of the presidential primary ballot. | ||
| If review is sought in the Supreme Court before the state expires in January 4, 2024, then the state shall remain in place and the Secretary will continue to be required to include President Trump's name on the 2024 presidential primary ballot until the receipt of any order and mandate from the Supreme Court. | ||
| So what you see there is these terrible, woke, runaway liberals with a horrific opinion. | ||
| Over 200 pages of nonsense. | ||
| And then they say, well, we actually don't have any power, and it's all up to the United States Supreme Court. | ||
| And right now, as of this moment, the district court decision controls, because there's a stay in the public court. | ||
| And that decision keeps President Trump on the ballot. | ||
| So the hysteria from the left-wing media, CNN, oh, big day in history, wrong. | ||
| These liberals not only got everything wrong, they were so gutless, they didn't even stand behind their own decision. | ||
| What do you anticipate? | ||
| Christie, Neocon, Nikki, Sununu, Fox, Murdoch News, they're going to be dancing on Trump's grave on this, are they not, sir? | ||
| Trying to turn it into something? | ||
| Well, let them dance, just like the Florida governor tried to dance after the corrupt, horrible, weaponized Manhattan DA indictment in March, only putting another nail in the coffin of his own, at that point, non-existent campaign, with Ron DeSantis's way too stupid joke about President Trump when the vogue radical DA Bragg indicted him in In Manhattan. | ||
| If these neocons, if these rhinos, if these pretenders want to do a dance, let them. | ||
| The MAGA Republican Party, the War Room Posse, the Trump Party, are only going to disdain them more and more and more. | ||
| President Trump's already at about 70, 75, only going up from here. | ||
| Unless this weaponization and targeting of law enforcement is allowed to take place, President Trump will never back down. | ||
| He'll continue to fight, and he will absolutely not cow down or cower to these four radical judges in Colorado. | ||
| We'll go to the United States Supreme Court, and every federal court that's ruled on this pathetic election interference attempt so far has ruled against the Radical Democrats, and for President Trump, who's going to be on the ballot in every state, will win the election and will walk back into the Oval Office Jan 20, 2025. | ||
| Boris, your social media people are going to want to follow you tonight. | ||
| Where do they go? | ||
| No doubt. | ||
| BorisCP.com is the website. | ||
| It's hotboriscp.com. | ||
| Hot on the getter at BorisCP. | ||
| Twitter at BorisCP. | ||
| True social, hot at Boris. | ||
| Hottest on the gram, Boris underscore Epstein. | ||
| Stay strong. | ||
| Do not cower. | ||
| All offense. | ||
| And God bless. | ||
| Boris, thank you very much. | ||
| I'll be up on Getter all night. | ||
| Also tomorrow morning at 10 we come back. | ||
| We're going to be all over this. | ||
| I'll have Mike Davis. | ||
| We'll be breaking it all down. | ||
| Very important, particularly how Nikki and these guys try to spin it. | ||
| Let me go to Ashton Hanson. | ||
| We just left AmFest. | ||
| I've got, I've got Raynard Jackson's got a report of what happened on the border and at Phoenix airport. | ||
| I want to hold that for tomorrow because I don't want to rush it. | ||
| It's too important. | ||
| Raynard. | ||
| One of the top voices in MAGA saw things that were unbelievable and only he can report it. | ||
| Ashton, tell us, coming out of there, the spirit, the energy, walk me through what you do for Turning Point and what did you think of the overall AmFest? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I see. | |
| Thank you so much for having me on. | ||
| I'm president and founder of the Williamson County Activism Hub in Franklin, Tennessee. | ||
| So what I do is I lead the activism hub. | ||
| We have different events every month with keynote speakers. | ||
| AmFest was phenomenal. | ||
| Having that many people who are like-minded and similar age to me in just one space over four days is fantastic. | ||
| You can't find anything like that anywhere else. | ||
| I mean, the fact that I could just walk anywhere and strike up a conversation with anybody and we would be able to converse about different ideas and ideologies and be able to respectfully have each other on a level that we understand, even though we have differing opinions about something, we can still respect each other. | ||
| Another key aspect is being able to see speakers That we have never been able to see in person. | ||
| I mean, being able to see Charlie Kirk or Mike Lindell or even you in person is fantastic because that's something that would be unattainable for someone like me otherwise. | ||
| I'm just a college student. | ||
| I'm not going to Washington D.C. | ||
| on a daily basis or I'm not going to the Capitol building. | ||
| The energy, the atmosphere, the amount of people that were there, it's unexplainable. | ||
| You have to be there for it. | ||
| You gotta be there. | ||
| What's your social media? | ||
| How do people follow you, Ashton? | ||
| You're one of the rising voices in the MAGA movement. | ||
| How do people get to you? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| So my turning point chapter is TPUSAWILCO. | ||
| That is T-P-U-S-A-W-I-L-C-O. | ||
| And my personal is AirborneEquestrian on Instagram. | ||
| Ashton Hansen from Tennessee, we love you. | ||
| Look forward to having you back. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| The energy there was incredible. | ||
| I want to thank Ashton, Charlie Kirk, Poso, the entire team. | ||
| It was incredible. | ||
| We're going to leave you with modern-day Holy War. | ||
| Remember, HomeTitleLock.com. | ||
| Do not let a hard money lender, some bad guy, take out a second mortgage you got to pay back. | ||
| HomeTitleLock.com. | ||
| Check it out today. | ||
| Cyber plus AI. | ||
| Lady No Grady, Modern Day Holy War. | ||
| We're back at 10 a.m. | ||
| Eastern Standard Time tomorrow morning. |
Export Selection