Feb. 7, 2024 - Bannon's War Room
47:56
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is what you're fighting for. | ||
| I mean, every day you're out there. | ||
| What they're doing is blowing people off. | ||
| If you continue to look the other way and shut up, then the oppressors, the authoritarians, get total control and total power. | ||
| Because this is just like in Arizona. | ||
| This is just like in Georgia. | ||
| It's another element that backs them into a corner and shows their lies and misrepresentations. | ||
| This is why this audience is going to have to get engaged. | ||
| As we've told you, this is the fight. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All this nonsense, all this spin, they can't handle the truth. | |
| War Room, Battleground. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| I want to read the statement that was just sent to me here by Trump campaign spokesman. | ||
| Quote, if immunity is not granted to a president, every future president who leaves office will be immediately indicted by the opposing party. | ||
| Without complete immunity, a president of the United States would not be able to properly function. | ||
| Again, that is the new statement just sent a minute ago by the Trump campaign spokesman here. | ||
| official acts is unconstitutional under the doctrine of presidential immunity and the separation of powers. Prosecuting a president for official acts violates the constitution and threatens the bedrock of our republic. President Trump respectfully disagrees with the DC Circuit's decision and will appeal it in order to safeguard the presidency and the constitution. Again, that is the new statement just sent a minute ago by the Trump campaign spokesman here. It's the thing it's important to note each of those issues that was outlined by the Trump campaign | ||
| in that statement was thoroughly written about by those three judges in their appeals decision here and in part of this I think it's important to pick out from the appeals court decision Each of those issues that was outlined by the Trump campaign in that statement was thoroughly written about by those three judges in their appeals decision here. | ||
| And in part of this, I think it's important to pick out from the appeals court decision which they write, former President Trump's stance would collapse our system of separated powers by placing the president beyond the reach of all three branches. | ||
| Of course, this is not just about the federal election interference charges against Donald Trump, but also the potential use of the Oval Office by presidents in the future. | ||
| Of course, Donald Trump is running for the nomination again. | ||
| He has talked about being dictator for a day. | ||
| He has talked about the strengths of having a strong man running a country. | ||
| And so the decision here by the appeals court in the likely Supreme Court hearing oral arguments and taking this case up themselves and ultimately issuing their final ruling will have great implications not only for this trial that is slated to take place against Donald Trump, also future presidents of the United States. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And other trials involving Donald Trump potentially as well. | |
| Von Hilliard, thank you so much for bringing us that breaking news. | ||
| The statement coming now from the Trump campaign following this decision by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and the three-judge panel that took up those arguments denying Trump's claims that he deserves presidential immunity and that the case should be dismissed. | ||
| We're going to squeeze in a very quick break. | ||
| Please stay with us. | ||
| Four motions to dismiss the indictment. | ||
| All four rejected. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I have two thoughts. | |
| One is substantive and one is the procedure of what's going to happen going forward. | ||
| Substantively, this is a unanimous body blow to each and every one of Donald Trump's arguments. | ||
| It is a huge victory for the government and completely vindicates Judge Chutkan in her ruling. | ||
| It affirms it in every way, shape, and form. | ||
| The court calls Donald Trump's arguments irrational. | ||
| In a brief quote for you, he said, at bottom, this is the court's opinion, at bottom, former President Trump's stance would collapse our system of separated powers By placing the president beyond the reach of all three branches. | ||
| It describes the president's position as saying that a former president would be free to commit all manner of crimes with impunity. | ||
| And it fundamentally rejects that in every single way. | ||
| Now turning to what can happen next, the court gives essentially Donald Trump one week and one week only to go to the Supreme Court. | ||
| It says that it will issue its mandate, that is sort of handing the ball back to Judge Chutkan at the end of February 12th. | ||
| The only way it will not do that is if, essentially, one of two things has to happen. | ||
| That a filing is made in the Supreme Court seeking review, which is by no means clear that that is going to be taken, because this is such a resounding victory in every way. | ||
| But that's something Donald Trump can do. | ||
| He can seek to have this heard by the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court does not have to take it. | ||
| The other way in which Donald Trump could try to stay this is by seeking the D.C. | ||
| Circuit itself to rehear this, but the court says on that there is no automatic stay that the mandate will still issue even if Donald Trump seeks that unless and until the D.C. | ||
| Circuit says, no, don't do that. | ||
| Meaning, Essentially, what they're telling Donald Trump is, don't look to the D.C. | ||
| Circuit for assistance in staying this case. | ||
| You really have to go to the Supreme Court. | ||
| So, all eyes right now should be on a filing that Donald Trump will certainly make in the next week, asking for Supreme Court review and what the Supreme Court does, because it's quite possible they reject that quickly, and this case will be back on before Judge Chetkin. | ||
| Okay, welcome. | ||
| Tuesday, 6 February, Year of the Lord 2024. | ||
| So much happened in the first hour. | ||
| So much happening today. | ||
| An explosive day in the nation's capital, and of course, throughout the rest of the country with just massive news. | ||
| Mike Davis. | ||
| Mike, you warned us about this, but I got to go to the second part first. | ||
| Weissman. | ||
| Because you said, you told us all this the other day, you thought it was going to be defeated at the D.C. | ||
| appeals court, the appellate court. | ||
| But is Weisman right? | ||
| Was this a resounding victory? | ||
| Was this such a crushing decision by this three-judge panel that they're basically telling you, they essentially crushed it. | ||
| You shouldn't go en banc to the whole thing because they're probably not going to hear it. | ||
| Your arguments are so, I think they quote it, irrational, that you need to go to immediately the Supreme Court. | ||
| Your assessment of this ruling, sir? | ||
| Well, it's a predictable ruling because the D.C. | ||
| Circuit is controlled by Democrats. | ||
| So you have these two Biden judges and a very weak Bush 41 judge who ruled the way they ruled. | ||
| It was predictable. | ||
| You could have predicted this by listening to their oral argument. | ||
| But here's the bigger issue. | ||
| What they did not establish, what Judge Chukin did not establish on the D.C. | ||
| District Court and what these three judges on the D.C. | ||
| Circuit did not establish that the President of the United States, any President of the United States is immune from criminal prosecution for their official acts, meaning members of Congress are immune both civilly and criminally for their official acts. | ||
| So are federal judges. | ||
| Why the hell wouldn't the President of the United States also be both immune civilly and criminally? | ||
| We've already established That the president is civilly. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, but didn't they, but didn't, but hang on, but didn't, didn't they take that? | |
| I hear you, but didn't you guys argued that the president argued that, didn't they say that and said, no, you, what you're arguing for is to put him higher above the law. | ||
| I mean, they heard your argument, but they counted it was saying that arguments are rational because to do what you want to do is to make the president, not just Trump, but you're making the office of the president, uh, you're making the office of the president above essentially the law above the courts, sir. | ||
| Well, that's what they said, but that's a silly argument because you can't charge members of Congress criminally for their official acts. | ||
| You can't charge federal judges criminally for their official acts. | ||
| How can you charge the president? | ||
| That violates the separation of powers. | ||
| Presidents should have immunity both civilly and criminally. | ||
| It's been established civilly. | ||
| The reason it has not been established yet criminally is this is the first time a former president has been charged by this Democrat law firm. | ||
| They've charged President Trump four times. | ||
| And if you read this opinion, they tried to make a Trump derangement syndrome exception. | ||
| They try to say that they're only deciding the facts. | ||
| They're only deciding the laws that relates to Trump and the facts of this case. | ||
| They're not going to decide this more broadly and that's just insane and that's why The Supreme Court of the United States will have to take this case because here's the precedent that's going to be set. | ||
| This means that the Trump 47 Justice Department can charge President Obama and his aides, including his legal advisor at the time, David Barron, who's now a federal circuit judge for capital murder for the drone strike on American citizens abroad, the extrajudicial murder of American citizens, including a 17-year-old, including a minor. | ||
| Because presidents don't have immunity under this DC Circuit ruling. The Trump 47 Justice Department can also charge Biden for his illegal release of these dangerous migrants who are going into our country and robbing and raping and murdering people. | ||
| Those are the natural consequences of these illegal releases of these dangerous migrants as they're going to commit crimes. So does that mean the Trump 47 Justice Department can charge President Biden because he broke the law by releasing these migrants into the So this is the path that we're going to go down. | ||
| These are republic-ending tactics. | ||
| This is how our country will fail if the President of the United States can indict and imprison his predecessor based upon what he did in his official capacity as the President of the United States. | ||
| That can't stand. | ||
| That's why the Supreme Court is going to have to take this case And establish at a baseline level that presidents like judges like members of Congress are immune from criminal prosecution for their official acts. | ||
| Don't you want to go en banc and explain to the audience, this is amazing, Katie Turner was hosting her show on MSNBC like two weeks ago. | ||
| She didn't know what the term en banc was. | ||
| Our audience does, but in en banc you have the entire circuit hear the case. | ||
| But you will get some consenting opinions, which you didn't get today. | ||
| Wouldn't that help you? | ||
| Look, I'm not a lawyer, not a constitutional lawyer in particular, I know you are. | ||
| Wouldn't that help you to get a couple of consenting opinions to help build the foundation for the case to the Supreme Court? | ||
| Yeah, and that's why this three-judge panel is being so transparently political and playing their games. | ||
| Generally, when you're dealing with issues of government immunity, including presidential immunity, the case is state. | ||
| It's stopped until the issues are resolved. | ||
| And the D.C. | ||
| Circuit today changed the normal rules for en banc review And punish President Trump and said that if you seek en banc review, we're not going to stay this case. | ||
| We're going to let this Biden special counsel Jack Smith and this D.C. | ||
| Obama judge railroad you with this illegal unconstitutional trial. | ||
| While the full D.C. | ||
| Circuit hears this case, right? | ||
| What they're trying to do, these Democrat judges, and I can't believe Judge Henderson was so dumb to go along with this, is they're trying to throw this hot potato on the Supreme Court's docket so when the Supreme Court does its job and rules for Trump that there's presidential immunity and sends this back down | ||
| To judge Chuck and to have a mini trial on what actions are immune and what actions are not immune, which actions are part of their official acts, including the outer perimeter of the official acts versus purely private actions. | ||
| What the Democrats want to do is destroy the legitimacy of the Supreme Court. | ||
| It's going to be a twofer. | ||
| Hold it. | ||
| This is why I wanted to have you on and have you on so quickly. | ||
| I knew there's lots of breaking news here at the six o'clock hour, but I had to get to this. | ||
| Let me understand this in the audience along with me. | ||
| Normally, what you're saying is that when a three-judge panel ruled against it, it would be stayed, assuming you either go en banc or the court, and you'd have to make that decision, but it would be stayed. | ||
| Here, you're saying they only kept it stayed for a week for the Supreme Court. | ||
| If he goes and wants to go en banc, the trial is not stayed? | ||
| They restart the process and start getting ready for trial? | ||
| Is that what you're telling me? | ||
| Correct, and you'll have this Obama-stacked DC circuit deny the stay, the en banc they'll deny the stay, saying that this case can proceed, can go ahead even though they haven't decided presidential immunity. | ||
| And the only way this would be staged is if they throw this hot potato at the Supreme Court. | ||
| Look, this is what the Democrats are trying to do. | ||
| They're trying to destroy Trump. | ||
| And destroy the legitimacy of the Supreme Court in the process because they know that the constitutionalist Supreme Court is the last thing in the Democrats way. | ||
| So they would love for the Supreme Court to rule for Trump and then destroy the legitimacy of the Supreme Court in the process. | ||
| You're saying if they hear it, without going en banc, because they can't stay, they can't slow it down, the Trump team decides, let's go to the court, the court takes this on, the court comes back and rules for the immunity, that then you'll see the city, it will be like the French Revolution, it will be nothing like Kavanaugh's When they ran across and tried to beat down the door. | ||
| It'll be nothing like Dobbs where they went to their homes and intimidated and of course the young women were out there in the plaza for a week. | ||
| You're saying it'll be worse than that? | ||
| That this is this will be the club that they'll use to say look this court stacked with Trump appointees that Mike Davis got through the system. | ||
| It's not a legitimate court. | ||
| It's a Trump court and therefore we got to take it down? | ||
| Yes, they will try to cow the Supreme Court justice. | ||
| They did this on the Dobbs ruling. | ||
| They threatened and intimidated the justices in their homes, even after the 1 a.m. | ||
| assassination attempt against Justice Kavanaugh, his wife Ashley, And their two teenage daughters. | ||
| They had Supreme Court justices in safe houses. | ||
| And the Biden White House Press Secretary and the Biden Justice Department said that these protesters had a First Amendment right to be outside of their homes, which is absolutely not true. | ||
| It is unlawful to protest someone in their home. | ||
| You do not have a First Amendment right to protest Outside someone's home because they can't leave their home, right? | ||
| And you definitely don't have a First Amendment right to protest outside of a federal judge's home while they're deciding a pending case. | ||
| That is obstruction of justice. | ||
| But we saw what they did with Dobbs. | ||
| Just imagine what they'll do with this Trump case. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This is shocking. | |
| I mean, this is why Weisman's got the smirk on his face because they understand the logical thing would be go en banc because you want a couple of the judges to render opposite opinions, you know, minority opinions, and you use those in making your argument to the Supreme Court later. | ||
| Here, they're trying to take that away. | ||
| They're trying to take away that step from President Trump by saying, hey, if you do that, the trial is going to go on as scheduled and you're going to have to deal with it. | ||
| Is that why Weisman was smirking? | ||
| Yeah, I mean, it shows that this is election interference. | ||
| They waited 30 months to bring these charges against Trump and they timed the trial to happen before the presidential election. | ||
| They rushed it. | ||
| They're skipping all the other January 6th defendants to rush President Trump's trial. | ||
| And what is the rush? | ||
| Why did they have to try this case before November 5th, 2024, other than lawfare, other than election interference? | ||
| And the facts that they're not going to stay this case while the DC circuit, the en bas court is going to consider this, shows that this is political by these judges. | ||
| It shows that they're participating in this election interference. | ||
| Walk me through, how is this going to impact, how's this ruling in the authoritative intimidation, how do you believe it's going to impact? | ||
| Because we have, this Thursday's a historical day before the Supreme Court, right? | ||
| I mean, this is where you're actually going to rule on this 14th Amendment, which has been so controversial about whether President Trump can even be on the ballot or not. | ||
| You know, these supporters of democracy, I think there's 30 states now that have different groups or source-backed groups, or some even have attorney generals in the left-wing states. | ||
| But this is historic. | ||
| Do you think this ruling, and as brutal as they kind of put down President Trump, do you think that's going to be in the back of the head of, you know, we've had some questions here about the Texas ruling on the southern border. | ||
| I know you and I both have kind of questioned why some of the justices, it's so straightforward that Texas has the constitutional right to defend itself. | ||
| Why they flipped. | ||
| Do you believe that this ruling today might actually be in their heads on this historic, uh, basically, uh, hearing pleading on, uh, on this Thursday? | ||
| I hope the Supreme Court doesn't play the political games where they can vote for Trump on this Colorado case because it's so easy. | ||
| It's such an easy decision. | ||
| And then they can use that to duck the presidential immunity case because what I'm telling the Supreme Court justices is this is so much bigger than Donald Trump. | ||
| If a president That's how we're going to destroy our country. | ||
| And so if the Supreme Court does not have the fortitude to establish that presidents, any president is immune criminally for their official acts, like members of Congress, Like federal judges, we're not going to have a country left when this is done. | ||
| Do you think that half of the American people are going to go along with the Biden special counsel, Jack Smith, and this Obama D.C. | ||
| judge, Tanya Shuckin, just throwing President Trump in prison and deciding the election that way instead of the American people on November 5th, 2024? | ||
| This is how our country is going to fall apart if this happens. | ||
| Historic week at the Supreme Court. | ||
| The stakes couldn't be higher. | ||
| Now, you're going to be covering for us. | ||
| You're going to be out there, real immersive. | ||
| We're just going to get a camera crew because this day at the Supreme Court is going to be so powerful. | ||
| Demuni, when do you believe we will see President Trump? | ||
| Do you believe they'll go en banc or do you think they'll say, hey, these guys are boxes in and we'll go right to the Supreme Court? | ||
| Do you think they'll go back and And try to go en banc on the immunity issue? | ||
| Because wouldn't you think that those dissenting opinions are so powerful to take to the court? | ||
| This is the perfect case to go en banc because this is a case of first impression. | ||
| We've never had a former president indicted like this before. | ||
| And so this is a weighty constitutional issue that goes to presidential immunity, that goes to the separation of powers. | ||
| Why would you want to punish A party like Trump to go to the full courts, all members of the DC circuit to weigh in other than the fact that you're trying to be political. | ||
| You're trying to rush this case to interfere in the presidential election. | ||
| They know that President Trump is on a glide path to win on November 5th, 2024, according to all polls, except if he is convicted in this DC case. | ||
| And so That is why they are trying to rush this by the Biden Justice Department and this D.C. | ||
| Obama judge, Tanya Shuckin, and apparently this D.C. | ||
| Circuit panel because they're not allowing President Trump to go through the normal en banc process with the D.C. | ||
| Circuit without being punished. | ||
| That is outrageous. | ||
| That is a blatant political game that they're playing and it shows that these judges are partisan and they are interfering in the election cycle. | ||
| Last thing, because I know you've, you've done such a good job on the, the last time we had, first off, you were the tip of the spear in getting these justices approved. | ||
| So you've been the mechanic and actually been in the trenches, you know, the difficulty of the, of the confirmation process. | ||
| You've also did such a great job on the last Supreme Court justice that was confirmed being an analyst for us and observer. | ||
| So do my ears come out. | ||
| I don't even know if they're interviews, these weird things that there's too much pressure. | ||
| She's ill. | ||
| It's the caseloads too much. | ||
| And all of a sudden I'm hearing voices on the left. | ||
| What's your assessment? | ||
| on her which is basically saying she's got to retire now because Trump's coming back right and Trump's gonna have then we'll have a 7-2 court right with with another hardcore MAGA judge she's got to go now what's your assessment first off of her even coming out and leaking this and doing of whining about the caseload I mean, you're a Supreme Court Justice, right? | ||
| It is a huge caseload. | ||
| That's why it's such special people that you pick and such intellectual giants, right? | ||
| Make this make sense to us. | ||
| It's not that hard of a job. | ||
| I mean, they have four law clerks, sometimes five law clerks, who help them write their opinions, research and write their opinions. | ||
| I seriously doubt if Justice Sotomayor is staying up until late into the evening researching and writing her opinions. | ||
| I would just say this, maybe she's frustrated because President Trump transformed the 5-4 left of center court to the 5-4 Clarence Thomas court, and so These three Democrat appointees on the court are writing their dissenting opinions pretty regularly. | ||
| I mean, that's what Justice Thomas had to do for the first decade he was on the court. | ||
| So it's probably exhausting for them to write their dueling, dumb, dissenting opinions all the time between Sotomayor and Justice Jackson, figuring out who could be the most emotive in their opinions. | ||
| It's probably exhausting. | ||
| So I actually think the most frustrated justice would be Justice Kagan. | ||
| Because she's gonna have to write many of her own dissents because she has the dueling dumb dissenting opinions. | ||
| The buried lead, we just made some news there. | ||
| Correct me if I'm wrong, but 5-4 Thomas Court means that you're saying Roberts is officially in the Mike Davis pantheon. | ||
| Roberts is with the liberals. | ||
| Did I take that shot across the bow to be Roberts is with the minority? | ||
| I would say he's not. | ||
| This is what I would say about the Chief Justice. | ||
| I think he's generally conservative, but he plays this game with the Supreme Court. | ||
| They call it chiefy, where he tries to depoliticize the court by making political decisions. | ||
| And all it does is it makes the court more political. | ||
| It makes these justices more susceptible to political pressure, which is exactly what you're not supposed to do. | ||
| So there are generally five judges on the Supreme Court who are constitutionalists, sometimes less, but generally five. | ||
| There are three liberals, two of whom write dueling dumb decisions, and then Elena Kagan is pulling her hair out Mike Davis, where do people go to get all your content? | ||
| colleagues and then there's the Chief Justice who thinks that by positioning the court to popular opinion, it depoliticizes the court, but it has the opposite effect. | ||
| Mike Davis, where do people go to get all your content? | ||
| Big week for Mike Davis in Article 3. | ||
| Article3project.org, you can donate there. | ||
| Article3project.org, at Article3project on Gitter, Twitter, Truth. | ||
| My personal is at MRDDMIA. | ||
| Thank you, Steve. | ||
| Thank you, brother. | ||
| If you listen to Mike Davis and you understand and believe his analysis, which we do here at The Worm, because it's very learned, you have this lawfare, which he argues is republic ending. | ||
| We also talk about what's happening to the Federal Reserve and this fiscal irresponsibility at the Capitol Hill. | ||
| And this is, remember, this is Powell says this, that's unsustainable. | ||
| That spending is, is republic ending. | ||
| You look at the Southern border and you've let in 8 to 10 million illegal alien invaders just on Biden's watch and according to Todd Bensman it could be 12 to 14 million by the time the regime's finished in January 2025. | ||
| This is why, and you see it every day, do not take my word for it, just see what you see, as the great French poet said. | ||
| See what you see. | ||
| Look at the chaos, the anarchy all around you. | ||
| And this is from the institutions. | ||
| This is what a fourth turning is about, the collapse of the institutions. | ||
| Times of turbulence, where has man always turned? | ||
| For financial stability. | ||
| It's been to precious metals. | ||
| And that's why you need to go to Birchgold. | ||
| Birchgold.com slash Bannon. | ||
| We've got tons of free information there. | ||
| The end of the dollar empire. | ||
| We're trying to get you up to speed on macroeconomics. | ||
| We're trying to get you up to speed on what the prime reserve is, prime reserve currency. | ||
| Even if you flunk math in high school, it doesn't matter. | ||
| We will make, we make the math pretty simple, but we make the concepts. | ||
| These important concepts accessible. | ||
| Birchgold.com slash Bannon. | ||
| Also talked to Philip Patrick and the team about why the BRICS nations, the nations that control the resources in the global south, why their central banks are buying gold at record rates 22, 23, and now in 24. | ||
| And the Federal Reserve of the United States is working on a central bank digital currency. | ||
| Why do we print fiat money and work on a digital currency when the rest of the world buys gold? | ||
| Ask Philip Patrick, virtualworld.com back in a moment. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room Battleground with Stephen K. Bannon. | |
| Can we get Ben Harnewell in here from Rome? | ||
| We're going to talk about what's happening with Ukraine and the other hotspots geopolitically. | ||
| One thing I want you to remember is that Xi, the Chinese economy is in complete freefall, total implosion. | ||
| They've lost $2.2 trillion in equity value in the last couple of weeks. | ||
| The commercial real estate is imploding. | ||
| Big article in the Financial Times, American hedge funds, etc. | ||
| are holding back or pulling back from investing because of what we call the Trump effect. | ||
| President Trump is not only positively affecting our stock market, but with his imminent return, but also people understand he's going to have tougher tariffs and be much tougher on China. | ||
| So their economy now realizing we finally convinced wall street and maybe some of Silicon Valley, it does not do any business to support the most murderous regime in mankind's history. | ||
| That'd be the Chinese communist party. | ||
| Part of this is for your own safety and security. | ||
| You're personally, cause you're a combatant in this. | ||
| Don't think because you're having a big impact on Capitol Hill, and you are, as a major protagonist, because you're in the ring fighting, you're not sitting on a ringside seat, that the world doesn't know that to them you're a problem. | ||
| This is why you're called a domestic terrorist in the United States all the time. | ||
| This is why you're debanked. | ||
| This is why you're deplatformed. | ||
| This is why they put those billboards up after January 6th in Lake Georgia. | ||
| If you know people have these tendencies, like own guns, you report them. | ||
| You know, the lives of others, the great film about the Stasi in East Germany. | ||
| Make sure the supply chains, and they're getting all over President Trump for some comment he made the other day, but you know, here on the supply chains, we've been talking about these since January, 2020. | ||
| Jace Medical built up a system to get you around that, to protect you from that. | ||
| So just go to jacemedical.com and find out what they've got with your medicine, how you get it, how you access it. | ||
| You can get all the information there because it's different state by state, but just go to JaceMedical.com. | ||
| Do that today. | ||
| Don't let the Chinese Communist Party put a chokehold on you. | ||
| It's hard enough combating them on a national power level. | ||
| Make sure they can't get into your business. | ||
| Ben Harnwell, there's a firefight right now between the border thing, Ukraine. | ||
| They're still trying to remember. | ||
| McConnell may be ousted here and he walked the plank to get money into the money laundering operation of Ukraine. | ||
| The world still awaits, and since you're one of the most, I think, best analysts of what's going on there, there's still the jurors that were like, what in the hell is happening with this coup? | ||
| Did Zelensky blink? | ||
| Is he going to lose credibility with the people? | ||
| Did this general, who's much more beloved than he is, Uh, really stand him down? | ||
| Did Victoria Nuland fail in her efforts, or did she succeed? | ||
| What's the U.S. | ||
| government doing? | ||
| Because it's quite confusing. | ||
| And here's the other thing, Ben, you should know. | ||
| In our country, it's almost gone radio silent. | ||
| I mean, every, for a while, for years, it was every night, it was the lead story, it was the lead story in the New York Times, it had wall-to-wall coverage, Washington Post, MSNBC, A-Block, CNN, A-Block of every show, Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine. | ||
| It's now crickets. | ||
| They may put Ambassador Taylor on on a Sunday afternoon in like three o'clock for the D block of a new show on Sunday afternoon. | ||
| But other than that, it's crickets. | ||
| What's going on here is as we now start to look at these bills and how to kill the rest of these bills on the funding of the money laundering operation. | ||
| Good afternoon, Steve. | ||
| Well, the big news today, Steve, is that there is no big news. | ||
| This is day eight. | ||
| Remembering, of course, that Monday of last week, President Zelensky did fire his commander-in-chief, General Zelensky. | ||
| And then whilst he was trying to appoint two generals, two senior generals to replace him, both of whom turned him down. | ||
| And then, of course, the Americans and the Brits came into play and told him to back down. | ||
| Eight days on, General Zelensky, who refused to resign, he refused to quit, is still in his post. | ||
| So to answer your question, yes, I think Victoria Nuland actually did accomplish something, as we call her on Geta, the Angel of Death, when the Angel of Death descended on Kiev last Wednesday. | ||
| In her emergency visit there, I think she did achieve something because the civilian government is still in place. | ||
| There hasn't been a military coup and there is this tension. | ||
| And the mainstream media, Steve, is describing this in sort of Highlander type terms. | ||
| There can be only one who that one is going to be. | ||
| It's only going to emerge with time, probably will be Zelensky. | ||
| But even if it happens in the next 24 hours, I think probably the sacking will happen in the next 24 hours or so. | ||
| But this is eight or nine days on, Steve. | ||
| The important thing that I think my takeaway on this won't change now. | ||
| And that is what was supposed to be a power play on behalf of On behalf of President Zelensky, a power move to show that who, Ukraine and the world, who really is in control. | ||
| Dolar illustrated, manifested his own weakness in Ukraine. | ||
| Eight days, Steve, eight days, possibly nine, possibly more, with a commander-in-chief who does not have his confidence, obviously, because he's tried to sack him. | ||
| In fact, he did sack him for that interim period. | ||
| Two or three hours and then had to back down. | ||
| So he obviously doesn't have his confidence in the middle of an existential war. | ||
| This has just illustrated the world how weak President Zelensky is. | ||
| Sticking, however, with Ukraine. | ||
| You know, we have been- Hold on, hold on, hold on. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Ho, ho, ho, ho, ho, ho. | |
| Right before we do that, just got to make sure, we just got to put in perspective what's happened here. | ||
| Because the voting now, you get the Monarchist impeachment vote teetering, you got everything. | ||
| I think the Israel bill, I believe it may be defeated because it's not going to have an offset. | ||
| My point is, the whole Senate apparatus is collapsing before our eyes. | ||
| I'm absolutely stunned. | ||
| When the voice for the Ukraine, the Atlanticists, has to be as loud as it's ever been, making a positive case for continuing American involvement at the $60 billion level. | ||
| It stuns me that they could just go radio silent. | ||
| Somebody should tell them, this is not the way the system works. | ||
| They have to be on MSNBC and CNN as the lead story all the time to get people's attention here, because right now they've been marginalized here. | ||
| And to go quiet, I mean, to me it shows, I think, is the Zelensky regime fighting for its life behind the scenes? | ||
| Do you believe that's happening? | ||
| Because if they don't put themselves out for it now, they're going to get no money. | ||
| And I have been fighting this from day one. | ||
| And I will tell you of all the fights we had, this might've been the longest shot because the overwhelming power of the defense industry in our country, the murderous sociopathic overlords, as you call them, is so powerful. | ||
| Uh, the greed for money of what this war does and not just that the rebuilding of this, as you know, the Larry Finks of the world was so powerful that it was a long shot. | ||
| Now we took it, but I'm stunned. | ||
| It's particularly as media savvy as Zelensky is. | ||
| that he doesn't get this. There's something deeply wrong there. Do you believe that behind the scenes this government is close to collapse? Well, you know, well yes, because the country is close to collapse. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| It. | ||
| It had been promised, I think, a million shells, hadn't it, by the United States? | ||
| Artillery shells, a million artillery shells, of which 300,000, I think, were said to have arrived. | ||
| Their armament cupboard is running bare now. | ||
| It's clear that it's only a question of time. | ||
| In what is a war of attrition, Ukraine can't keep up fighting with military equipment it doesn't have, it no longer has, with armed forces that have been depleted, that it no longer has the political strength to draft 500,000 Ukrainians, an issue, a hot potato, so toxic neither the civilian government nor the military administration wants to touch it, though both sides realise that that would be necessary to continue this war. | ||
| So Ukraine itself Aye. | ||
| in what is an existential war, what it has made into an existential war. | ||
| It didn't have to be like that. | ||
| What the Biden administration has pushed into an existential war for Ukraine is obviously going to be existential also for the government, because when this war does push into now, we're not really talking about negotiating tables anymore, simply because Putin's holding all the cards. | ||
| So when so when Putin has. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Those opposed say no. | |
| The ayes have it. | ||
| The gentleman from Utah. | ||
| Mr. Speaker, I request the yeas and nays. | ||
| The yeas and nays are requested. | ||
| Those favoring a vote by the yeas and the nays will rise. | ||
| A sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. | ||
| Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed. | ||
| We are watching the impeachment vote of Mayorkas. | ||
| Here's what it was. | ||
| It's 215 to 215. | ||
| 215 to 215 and Scalise is Scalise is out for cancer treatment Buck and Gallagher surprising Gallagher joy Joyce of Ohio Gallagher of Wisconsin have voted no it It's 215 to 215 even as we speak. | ||
| And this thing could get a little chaotic as we go forward. | ||
| 215 to 215. | ||
| Steve Scalise could not make the vote. | ||
| We understand he's recovering from cancer. | ||
| You know, his medical, I think he's doing chemo. | ||
| And so that's, can I have, go ahead and put it in my ear what's happening so I can hear it. | ||
| Let's go ahead and go back to the floor for a second. | ||
| Right now it's 215 to 215. | ||
| Democrats are calling for the vote to end. | ||
| I think that's what they've done. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Let's go ahead and go back to this. | |
| And just a moment ago the vote to impeach the Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas not passing as it ended 214 to 216. | ||
| Going on now to a vote on Israel funding. | ||
| This bill would provide 17... Okay. | ||
| Now you're going to go to the all-important Israel funding bill. | ||
| So it looks like there's a flip at the end. | ||
| Mayorkas has voided impeachment after two years of working on this, 2014 to 2016. | ||
| It was 215 to 215 tie. | ||
| Uh, people were working on it. | ||
| Uh, so, um, but the breaking news here, the house rejected an effort to impeach Homeland Security, Mallorca's 214 to 216. | ||
| This I got to tell you is absolute catastrophe for Johnson. | ||
| This thing should have been whipped. | ||
| It should have been whipped even harder. | ||
| It's outrageous that all the work that went into this... all the work that went into this... all the work that went into this ended with this. | ||
| Hang on one second. | ||
| Can we cut down the outside noise that's out here? | ||
| We're producing this on the fly right now. | ||
| I wanted to get into our... | ||
| I'll try to continue with Ben if we can, but I've got to cover this. | ||
| A 214 to 216, it was 215 to 215. | ||
| The no votes from the Republicans were Ken Buck, who had told people about that. | ||
| You had Gallagher, who I think officially ended his political career. | ||
| I will say that. | ||
| I don't know how he goes to any higher office having voted not to impeach Mayorkas. | ||
| And of course, Joyce, who's always a wild card there. | ||
| I think he's Homeland Security. | ||
| Uh, or close to the Homeland Security, uh, Secretary Green or, uh, Committee Head Green. | ||
| So absolutely devastating. | ||
| Let me repeat that. | ||
| 2-14 to 2-16 was the vote, uh, the vote, um, to impeach Mayorkas and lost. | ||
| Remember, you lose by one vote, you lose by one vote. | ||
| 2.14 to 2.16, it was 2.15, 2.15. | ||
| Someone changed your vote there at the very end. | ||
| It looks like Steve Scalise, at least their initial reporting, Steve Scalise was ill, was out with his cancer treatment. | ||
| So where this put us, today has been an incredible day. | ||
| We've seen the absolute collapse of the border, you know, the amnesty, the invasion bill. | ||
| That will, I understand, our understanding right now on the whip count tomorrow is that even McConnell and Lankford, Lankford negotiated, really McConnell was the puppet master there. | ||
| They're going to actually vote no, I think, on cloture tomorrow. | ||
| It will not get cloture. | ||
| That means it won't go to the floor. | ||
| It'll have to go back to the drawing board. | ||
| The Senate's about to take off for two weeks. | ||
| For President's Day recess, so they won't be back. | ||
| Of course, you're having now the historic vote. | ||
| We'll cut to that hopefully in a second if we can do it before Lou Dobbs picks up. | ||
| We're going to get to the historic vote over Israel funding. | ||
| The debate on the Israel funding was kind of a firestorm. | ||
| Many of the Democrats AOC and of course the squad and other members saying that you shouldn't fund a right-wing Bibi Netanyahu government, that you shouldn't fund essentially genocide. | ||
| The Republicans taking the opposite view, although there was a significant amount of Republicans, I think 30, 40, 50, Freedom Caucus and others, Like ourselves are saying, hey, we support the fact that to defend Israel, we support the arms shipments. | ||
| We oppose what Biden's trying to do to stop the war. | ||
| But we do not agree with doing this without cuts. | ||
| It's a $7 trillion federal budget. | ||
| If we're going to send $17 billion of arms to Israel armaments, it's got to be offset. | ||
| And some of the recommendation we had is you cut the United Nations budget, you can cut the USAID budget, you can cut all the aid we're giving to the enemies of Israel because right now you're on both sides of the trade. | ||
| And both sides of the trade just doesn't work, right? | ||
| It just doesn't work. | ||
| This is why we're trying to demand and force Biden to come to the House floor and put a proposal for a resolution War Powers has been so much counter-offensive to the Houthis, you know, what 150 airstrikes and you can't hit that's just not retaliation for what's happening to our the combatants our battle group out in the in the Red Sea. | ||
| This is clearly going this is not just protecting You know, flags, ships from the rest of the nations transporting oil and other material from Asia through the Suez Canal to Europe. | ||
| This is actually now getting into Americans absolutely as combatants in the Middle East. | ||
| We just had three soldiers die from Georgia defending the Jordan and the Jordan and Syria border. | ||
| To go back before we jump out of here. | ||
| And by the way, Lou Dobbs is going to follow us. | ||
| We're going to be back here at 10 a.m. | ||
| tomorrow morning. | ||
| So much happening tonight. | ||
| So much overnight. | ||
| I know that the recriminations on this, and you got to talk, you got to think about Emmer, you got the whip, you got to think about Johnson, right? | ||
| You only bring this to the floor when you know you have the votes and it shouldn't have been any surprises. | ||
| They were trying to twist the arm there at the end of Gallagher of Wisconsin. | ||
| Gallagher, you know, I have not been completely supportive of how he's run the China committee. | ||
| I think it's been a little soft, but he's done overall a pretty good job. | ||
| But this is just a devastating move to have this thing lose by two votes and know that Gallagher was 215 to 215 and Gallagher would not change his vote. | ||
| But we have to call it like it is. | ||
| This is a devastating loss. | ||
| After two years of work, after all that effort, after all the, and remember, Mayorkas was central to The Amnesty Bill or the Border Invasion Bill or, you know, the Border Authorization Bill, whatever you want to call this debacle that cratered before our eyes, that even Mitch McConnell and Lankford will vote against it tomorrow or will not vote to break closure and to take it forward. | ||
| Even the architects have voted against it. | ||
| The centerpiece of that bill was the Department of DHS. | ||
| It was Mayorkas. | ||
| What are you supposed to do? | ||
| I call him the emperor. | ||
| Now, we interviewed MTG in the previous hour, and I said, hey, this guy, if you look at structurally, he's the emperor of the United States of what this bill's done. | ||
| And remember, that bill went into, I think, the first and beginning of the second year of Trump's second term. | ||
| So it kind of handcuffed President Trump and made Mayorkas. | ||
| Obviously, we would get another D.H. | ||
| We would get another D.H. | ||
| secretary. | ||
| I would hope it would be somebody like a Mark Green or an MTG. | ||
| To enforce the law, but I said this guy's an emperor. | ||
| At the same time, in the same 24-hour period, we're going to impeach him. | ||
| Historically, we have not impeached anybody since, I think, 1876. | ||
| Secretary Belknap, who actually technically resigned before the impeachment, but he still had a trial in the Senate defending himself there as a former Secretary of War. | ||
| This is historic. | ||
| It has not happened in, what, 150 years? | ||
| And the Republican Party, the feckless Republican Party, does something this important, and they bring it up, of a guy who did not enforce the laws on the books. | ||
| In fact, went out of his way to break the laws in the books. | ||
| And that's what he's impeached for, as he should be impeached. | ||
| And they, at the end of the day, can't whip the vote. | ||
| To make sure they have people that even could say, just not show up, or not vote. | ||
| But to have, it looks like Joyce and Gallagher, we'll find out who else, but Joyce and Gallagher to vote no. | ||
| You know, Buck is leaving. | ||
| Buck could have very easily just taken a pass on this thing. | ||
| But this is outrageous, and if Gallagher thinks he's sending some big message that he's so high and mighty and he reports to some higher power than the rest of us, that he's special, I think he's got another thing coming. | ||
| As Marjorie Taylor Greene said today, you know, pray God's mercy on those that vote against us because it's so outrageous what's happening on the southern border. | ||
| Does he not think there's an invasion going on? | ||
| Does he not think Mayorkas reporting to Biden, who I think Biden also ought to be impeached on the border also, but you start with Mayorkas and you go through all this and all this work and all the committee hearings and you have the rest of your colleagues out there hanging out on a limb on this and you just high and mighty say you're not going to do it and we end up not impeaching Mayorkas? | ||
| People have to realize this is why the Republican Party's in the shape it's in. | ||
| This is why the Republican Party's in the shape it's in. | ||
| Because you have too many feckless, too many hapless, too many gutless people. | ||
| And that's got to change. | ||
| And so, hey, it's very simple. | ||
| Throw the bums out. | ||
| If they're not prepared to execute on what the people want, if they're not prepared to execute on what's appropriate, if they don't sit there and get the job done, then it's time to turf them out and move them out of here. | ||
| Lou Dobbs is going to take up for here. | ||
| We're going back here at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. | ||
| I'm telling you, it's going to be a firestorm with what happened in the appellate court today, what's going to happen in the Supreme Court later this week, the whole thing about getting President Trump out with this entire issue about spending. | ||
| You're going to have the Israel vote here in a moment. | ||
| Maybe if Grace and Mo can continue to stream it on Getter, I'll jump into the conversation over there because it'll be very historic. | ||
| I want to make sure two things. | ||
| Two things to keep in mind here. | ||
| Number one, obviously, Birchgold, end of the dollar empire, but now you're going to see turbulence like you've never seen before. | ||
| Talk to the experts at Birchgold. | ||
| Birchgold.com slash Bannon. | ||
| You get Philip Patrick, the best in the business on the team. | ||
| You get all the information you need about your 401ks, RRAs, all of that. | ||
| Gold is a hedge against these turbulent financial times. | ||
| Also, Jim Rickards was on. | ||
| We're going to have Jim on hopefully next week. | ||
| Jim Rickards is one of the world's experts in currency. | ||
| He's got this monthly newsletter called Strategic Intelligence from Paradigm Press. | ||
| Go check that out. | ||
| Go over there and check that out now. | ||
| Paradigm Press. | ||
| Jim Rickards, one of the top experts in the world in currency. | ||
| Okay, historic day. | ||
| The vote of Mayorkas. | ||
| Mayorkas has not been impeached by the House. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Lost by two votes it looks like. | |
| Lou Dobbs follows us next. | ||
| We're gonna be back at 10 a.m. | ||
| tomorrow morning when you'll be in the War Room. |
Export Selection