April 26, 2024 - Bannon's War Room
48:50
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| And that's a kind of masochistic capitulationism to Donald Trump's authoritarianism. | ||
| Of course we've got to hold the president accountable to the law. | ||
| I mean, it's the basic premise of our law that nobody is above the law, including the president. | ||
| And when they say, oh, well, you can impeach and convict him and then you could prosecute him, again, that twists the language and turns it upside down in the Constitution. | ||
| It says even if you're impeached and convicted, nevertheless you can still be prosecuted and tried and convicted and punished, presuming, presupposing that of course the president is subject to criminal law. | ||
| And now we've got a bunch of justices who are asking questions that indicate that they are as corrupted as the members of Congress who I serve with. | ||
| When we get through this period, this miserable period of American history, and we will get through it and we're going to beat them all in November, which is the only solution to this nonsense, these people are going to be fit only for selling incense and flowers at Dulles Airport. | ||
|
unidentified
|
There's no cause for alarm in any of this. | |
| God bless you, my child. | ||
|
unidentified
|
As long as Joe Biden is reelected. | |
| Because if that was a given fact, if he was running with, say, the 18-point lead in the polls that Bill Clinton had at a certain point in his re-election campaign, there would be a lot less nervousness about this, because we would know eventually this process will work, and if they send it back to Judge Chutkan, Judge Chutkan can actually have an evidentiary hearing. | ||
| And actually bring witnesses in in a way that she can't now. | ||
| And so there would then be some actual under oath testimony about all this stuff before the election, if they do that. | ||
| And then eventually you'd get through all this prosecution. | ||
| I actually think Joe Biden is going to be reelected. | ||
| So I'm not terribly concerned about what they're going to do in terms of slowing this thing down. | ||
| But what you saw, the fundamentals of what you saw and what we discovered clearly today, Is that there is a group on the Supreme Court who believe that their duty is to protect the Constitution and the law, and there's a possibly larger group who believe their duty is to protect the president, not all presidents, the president named Trump. | ||
| I do. | ||
| And, you know, to Joyce's point, the justices did not laugh this lawyer out of the room. | ||
| Not only that, but the consensus at the end of this two hours and 40 minutes was that Trump, in effect, was going to win, not perhaps the full case, but to win. | ||
| But the justices don't want to admit that they're winning. | ||
| Nothing that happened today with the Supreme Court being in the tank for Donald Trump is surprising to you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
At all. | |
| No. | ||
| It's not surprising to me. | ||
|
unidentified
|
At all. | |
| It's not surprising to your viewers at home. | ||
| You know why? | ||
| Because we're not stupid, alright? | ||
| Donald Trump called his shot months ago. | ||
| He said, my Supreme Court justices will never let this happen to me, and he was absolutely right. | ||
| So with that information, my question to the American people is now, what are you prepared to do? | ||
| Because the Supreme Court has exposed itself as a partisan institution full of hacks that will do everything in their power to protect Donald Trump and make sure that a Republican can be elected, not just in the next election, but in every election going forward. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| So what are we going to do about that? | ||
| And my answer to that, obviously, is that you cannot do anything in this country unless you expand the Supreme Court, take away their power, and as you say, start removing some of these conservative justices who have already exposed themselves as criminals and liars. | ||
| The not consensus but I think widely held view of today's proceedings at the United States Supreme Court is that the conservatives on the court will likely succeed in using this case to further and fatally delay criminal court proceedings against Donald Trump before the election in November. | ||
| Rather than reject his claims of immunity from prosecution, like all the federal judges who have considered this matter before them have done, they instead will carve out some newly specified class of actions that are immune from prosecution if you're a president. | ||
| And they will invent a test for deciding what counts as that kind of action by a president. | ||
| And then they will send Trump's indictment, Trump's federal January 6th case, back through a whole new cycle in the lower federal courts to run his attempted overthrow of the government through the court's newly invented legal test that they are going to make for him in this case. | ||
| Which, yes, will take forever. | ||
| Because in the meantime, of course, he will get a chance to get back into the White House in order to shut the whole thing down. | ||
| This is the primal scream of a dying regime. | ||
| Pray for our enemies. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Because we're going medieval on these people. | |
| I got a free shot on all these networks lying about the people. | ||
| The people have had a belly full of it. | ||
| I know you don't like hearing that. | ||
| I know you try to do everything in the world to stop that, but you're not going to stop it. | ||
| It's going to happen. | ||
| And where do people like that go to share the big line? | ||
|
unidentified
|
MAGA Media. | |
| I wish in my soul, I wish that any of these people had a conscience. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Ask yourself, what is my task and what is my purpose? | |
| If that answer is to save my country, this country will be saved. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bowne. | ||
| It's Friday, 26th April in the year of our Lord 2020. | ||
| You saw last, look, we could have put hours. | ||
| We curated this. | ||
| We could do a half hour of just highlight reel. | ||
| I don't think we've ever seen the more complete and total meltdown. | ||
| Because remember, you can see by this vast conspiracy, and it's a vast conspiracy, criminal conspiracy, to put President Trump in prison. | ||
| It's playing out in this joke in New York. | ||
| We're going to get to all that today. | ||
| They control the faculties of the colleges. | ||
| They control the administration. | ||
| This is why particularly all the billionaires have underwritten this crap for decades and decades and decades. | ||
| Now they'll be out there whining like, oh my gosh, I can't believe this. | ||
| You have underwritten these faculties. | ||
| You have underwritten these administrations. | ||
| These are radical Marxist, and now you've got it combined with Sharia supremacist. | ||
| That's what you've got exploding on college campuses. | ||
| But the judiciary was the first to fall. | ||
| The radicalization Of the federal courts, of the Justice Department, all of it. | ||
| All of it. | ||
| And this is what, knowing they couldn't beat Trump, this is what they depended upon. | ||
| And because of heroes, and these people are heroes, the Julie Kellys, the Mike Davises, the Jeff Clarks, and our first guest up this morning, the Mark Paolettas, these heroes that put their shoulder to the wheel and say, no, no, no, no, no, no. | ||
| Across the board, we can fight this. | ||
| We can fight this because there are still some judges and justices that believe in the Constitution and will support the Constitution. | ||
| Look at the radical nature of what you just heard right there. | ||
| This is what our fight is against. | ||
| And don't think it's not a war to the knife. | ||
| Right there, they're calling the Supreme Court justices criminals that have to be removed. | ||
| Criminals that have to be removed. | ||
| And obviously the subtext there is they've got to steal the election this November because they have to pack the court. | ||
| The stakes, if the stakes on November, on 5 November could have gotten any higher, they just got higher in the last 24 hours. | ||
| Here's one of the reasons why. | ||
| When immunity, when the Clarks and the Paolettas and the Mike Davises and people started working on this immunity thing months ago, you've got to remember, we would play you the highlight reel every night. | ||
| They were mocking and ridiculing. | ||
| Oh, this thing could be briefed. | ||
| They don't even need a hearing. | ||
| This could be briefed in 15 minutes. | ||
| You could write two briefs. | ||
| Even the concept of this was mocked and ridiculed. | ||
| You should have seen during the arguments yesterday, the faces on the radical left media. | ||
| Because all of a sudden, they got mugged by reality. | ||
| On the 14th Amendment case, they're going to get mugged by reality. | ||
| On the Fisher case, they got mugged in reality yesterday. | ||
| And then, of course, we forced out this, uh, this report, this interim report, which the president just mentioned when he walked in, he has not had a chance to read it, on, on Jordan's first cut of just New York, of just having, of having, uh, of having Colangelo and DOJ hardwired into the case, running the case, the architects of the case, and Congressman Gooden from Texas, I think was on Fox this morning. | ||
| Now, he's kind of a backbencher, but he's at least a voice saying, hey, what the hell's going on here? | ||
| That's once again the Jeff Clarks of the world, the Mike Davises of the world, the Mark Payalettas of the world. | ||
| And it was against the longest of long odds. | ||
| And now you're seeing the results of this. | ||
| This is a war to the knife to November to 5 November because they win. | ||
| They steal this and win. | ||
| You're going to see a radical transformation of the federal judiciary. | ||
| You watch this is going to be something's going to make the what Roosevelt tried to do in the 30s look like a church picnic. | ||
| Mark Paoletta, you join us now. | ||
| One of the fighters that have had the back of so many people and been the tip of the spear over at CRA. | ||
| Just give us your assessment first off of what happened yesterday and then the full total meltdown of the left-wing media that really focuses. | ||
| And remember Ari Melber, O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow. | ||
| You saw poor Rachel. | ||
| She hasn't slept in a week it looks like. | ||
| You got all of them. | ||
| They put so much in the courts because they control the courts. | ||
| Mark Paoletta. | ||
| Great day for the president yesterday, Steve. | ||
| You know, I think the Supreme Court looked at this crazy argument. | ||
| You know, the fact that this is even being argued, the fact that the president's even being prosecuted for this is just deranged left warfare. | ||
| But this Supreme Court and the justices up there, most of them said this is going down a dangerous road. | ||
| Of course, presidents have immunity for their official act. | ||
| That's been since Marbury versus Madison. | ||
| This has been established. | ||
| The constitutional structure where they have an impeachment clause that says after impeachment and conviction, then you can be prosecuted. | ||
| But nothing, you know, in terms of your official acts, that is immune and protected, just like the Supreme Court established in 1982, you know, sort of made clear with respect to immunity for in civil actions. | ||
| So I think what as you as you talk about, remember, the left even didn't want the Supreme Court to take this case up, right? | ||
| They went ballistic when they decided to grant cert on this on this case from the DC Circuit. | ||
| What I find astonishing that even Chief Justice Roberts yesterday They absolutely blasted the D.C. | ||
| Circuit case and, quite frankly, the District Court for doing no work and short-shifting this entire argument, right? | ||
| So they are afraid of the truth. | ||
| They are afraid of being held accountable by the Constitution. | ||
| And that's what this meltdown's about. | ||
| You're right. | ||
| You know, all the geniuses said it was a slam dunk on the 14th Amendment Section 3 argument, right? | ||
| 9-0 they lost, OK? | ||
| I think it's at least going to be 6-3. | ||
| I could even see, it's insane to say that the president doesn't have, as the DC Circuit said, the president doesn't have any immunity for his official acts. | ||
| For criminal prosecution. | ||
| So, again, thank God, actually, right, also for President Trump appointing those three justices. | ||
| As I pointed out when you saw Justice Kavanaugh mentioned yesterday in the argument, one of the worst cases, right, one of the worst decisions of the Supreme Court was Morrison v. Olson, which allowed federal judges, right, this was a Congress mechanism to get President Reagan, right, federal judges to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the president and prosecute. | ||
| That's the most insane structure and destruction of our separation of powers that the judiciary is setting up prosecutors that are unaccountable to anybody, okay? | ||
| And that law, once it bit the Democrats, right, and Bill Clinton, they wanted it gone and they let it lapse, right? | ||
| But it was an eight-to-one decision to uphold that structure, and that opinion was written by Chief Justice Rehnquist. | ||
| You had so many Republicans, terrible justices, certainly in terms of their jurisprudence, upholding something like that. | ||
| Flash forward to yesterday, and a Supreme Court with three Trump appointees, Justice Thomas, our greatest justice, our greatest living American, Sam Alito on there, they all recognize that this is a rule of law country. | ||
| The Constitution does protect presidents. | ||
| They want the founders set it up that presidents would be protected in their official actions, what they're doing in office, these split-second decisions, these weighty decisions to protect our liberty, our country. | ||
| And the idea that presidents would have to worry, as you're seeing today, it couldn't have been a better split screen of a crazy, out-of-control prosecutor in New York with a bogus case that nobody would bring, because there was no case there, to bring it up during the election year, driven, as you said, this great report by Jim Jordan that just got released yesterday, that documents the maniacal, single-focus effort to get a person, not to enforce the | ||
| laws, to get a person, that person being President Trump, to destroy him. | ||
| This is the thuggery. | ||
| This is what the Democrats project. | ||
| Right? | ||
| That's what they do. | ||
| This is what they do. | ||
| They use the law. | ||
| They weaponize the law. | ||
| They weaponize the Justice Department. | ||
| The Justice Department was weaponized against conservatives, even under a Republican president, okay? | ||
| So, you know, there needs to be a reckoning, okay? | ||
| The left is out of control with these prosecutions. | ||
| I thought it was a great day. | ||
| Going back to yesterday's argument, I listened to the whole thing. | ||
| You're right. | ||
| The media was thunderstruck that actually the Constitution protects the president from his official acts. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And if we want to go down that road... Hang on, hang on. | |
| We're going to break. | ||
| I've got to hold you. | ||
| We're going to hold Mark Paoletto over at the Center for Renewing America. | ||
| We got Jeff Clark on deck, Mike Davis, because this is absolutely pure signal. | ||
| The country's in the balance. | ||
| The court's in the balance. | ||
| in this election. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Short break, back in a moment. | |
| Okay, times of turbulence and we got them, baby, and it's only going to get worse. | ||
| I'm telling you, the stakes could not, if you thought the stakes were high before of the direction of salvation of the republic, now they're pretty open. | ||
| They're going to just, as bad as the courts have been, you ain't seen nothing because their target now is to eviscerate the courts. | ||
| They say the justices are criminals. | ||
| The justices are criminals. | ||
| That's playing on a major news network. | ||
| The justices are criminals. | ||
| And we have a vast conspiracy here that Mike Johnson, you know, Polly Pockets has got to step up. | ||
| You don't need to be running around giving all these speeches and trying to raise money. | ||
| What you need to do is contact a guy named Jim Jordan because their staff is saying that you're suppressing, that you suppress this report. | ||
| People shouldn't stand. | ||
| Us beating on this every day and all of a sudden a 300 page report appears mysteriously. | ||
| Grace and Mo, if you can put, I want to make sure the report, and I want the audience this weekend to read the report. | ||
| The president's gonna get it now. | ||
| The reason is, nobody, it doesn't, isn't it odd that nobody gave it to his staff? | ||
| This report's been done for a couple of three weeks, let's say. | ||
| It's 300 pages of incredible detail, footnotes, interviews, subpoenas, interviews, all of it. | ||
| Pomerantz they go after and they talk about him taking the Fifth Amendment. | ||
| He was the original prosecutor that dropped going forward because he said this case up there is a joke. | ||
| Why is this thing just seeing the light of day in the last 48 hours? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Why? | |
| And quite frankly, if we hadn't have been, you know, our typical jerk selves here, hammering people every day, not that we want to spend time on that, but sometimes you have to, it would have never seen the light of day. | ||
| Let me repeat that. | ||
| It would have never seen the light of day. | ||
| It was buried. | ||
| So what does Polly Pockets have as an explanation? | ||
| When the President supports him 100% that he mentioned to the President he had this and he was suppressing it? | ||
| When he briefed the President Mar-a-Lago, did he ever mention to the President that the Judiciary Committee had a 300-page report that showed, at least in that aspect, a criminal conspiracy to go after, to persecute him? | ||
| I think that's what the headline, I think that's what the title of the report is. | ||
| I just have one simple question. | ||
| When he met at Mar-a-Lago, behind closed doors, did Johnson mention to the President what actually Judiciary had and why it had not come out yet? | ||
| Did he mention that he was suppressing it? | ||
| Did he mention that he had other ideas and maybe it shouldn't come forward? | ||
| And inquiring minds want to know, because therein lies the rub. | ||
| The Republican establishment does not want Donald Trump to return as President of the United States, full stop. | ||
| Their plan is to pick up a couple of seats and control the Senate, to hold the House and pick up a couple of seats, control the House, and then, in their mind, hey, as bad as Biden is, we got him blocked, he's an old guy, we got him blocked, but Trump is gone, and with Trump gone, MAGA's gone. | ||
| And then and they look at Pennsylvania with those votes for Nikki Haley. | ||
| They said we can rebuild the traditional neoliberal neocon because we got Fox and we got the stupid talking points and we got still got the RNC. | ||
| We got the stupid talking points and we can just go out there and tell people and eventually MAGA will acquiesce and people go about their lives of being the proletariat they are and just, you know, working and paying taxes and giving some money to the RNC and giving money to Nikki Haley's 2028 campaign and Bob's your uncle. | ||
| Note to self, Republican establishment and Polly Pockets Johnson, take out your number two pencil. | ||
| In fact, maybe you take out a pen on this one, because that ain't going to happen. | ||
| Not on our watch. | ||
| OK, there's a vast conspiracy. | ||
| Look, the Jeff Clark's of the world. | ||
| Mike Davis is different. | ||
| He's a crazy fighting Irishman. | ||
| Mark Pagliato is one of the most reasoned, calm guys. | ||
| I was honored to be part of this five-man committee, working group that was selecting the judges and evaluating the judges. | ||
| Mark Pagliato is, and you truly see, he is in the lineage of Justice Thomas. | ||
| And those guys, and if you look at the coaching trees like they do in the NFL, those, all those clerks and people that are associated with Justice Thomas, there's something special about these guys. | ||
| So he's not a hair and fire guy. | ||
| Jeff Clark is the farthest from a hair and fire guy. | ||
| And they're telling you, like Mike Davis said, this is Republic ending of what they're trying to do. | ||
| Look at last night. | ||
| I don't think he put up all the crazy stuff. | ||
| We put up some crazy, but there was crazier than that. | ||
| They're calling these justice criminals on a case they mocked us on and said was not even worthy of coming forward. | ||
| You remember that? | ||
| Night after night after night. | ||
| This thing could be briefed in 15 minutes. | ||
| You just need, you don't even need a hearing. | ||
| This is ridiculous. | ||
| This is more MAGA. | ||
| Hey, well, they ain't laughing now. | ||
| They're damn worried. | ||
| I want to particularly talk about, they're apoplectic. | ||
| It's up on Drudge Today, Tom. | ||
| They're apoplectic that the three Trump justices didn't recuse themselves on Justice Thomas every day for some other case. | ||
| They just want him to recuse from the Supreme Court. | ||
| And you got Jamie Raskin in the White House. | ||
| Jamie Raskin in the White House. | ||
| Jamie Raskin is the lead attack dog, right? | ||
| Tell me about Raskin, Mark Paoletta. | ||
| Jamie Raskin, of course, led the impeachment, the bogus impeachment, second one against President Trump. | ||
| He's a Democrat from Maryland. | ||
| But interestingly, Jamie Raskin, for I think three or four years, four or five years, didn't disclose that his wife had about a million dollar asset. | ||
| The C.R.A. | ||
| has filed a complaint. | ||
| They talk about people being accountable. | ||
| You heard that clip at the beginning of your segment about not being above the law. | ||
| Members of Congress are above the law, quite frankly. | ||
| They don't even have conflict of interest laws that apply to them. | ||
| They're the only branch. | ||
| The judiciary does, the executive branch does. | ||
| In the executive branch, it's a criminal provision. | ||
| But in Congress, no, you don't have that. | ||
| Just like Sheldon Whitehouse, okay, whose wife is a big environment, marine biologist or something like that. | ||
| She's worked for a number of contractors, number of companies, and he's taken actions repeatedly that benefit, significantly benefit her companies. | ||
| And he helps her companies out. | ||
| He goes up, he has speeches for them, participates in round tables with her companies. | ||
| And so it's a joke, right, that these members of Congress are calling on recusals for the justices. | ||
| Now, going back to that, they've been going after Justice Thomas for 40 years, you know, and right now they want to shrink the court. | ||
| That's what they want to do, Steve. | ||
| They want to take off justices because they want their preferred liberal justices to decide these cases. | ||
| As you said, the left is absolutely furious. | ||
| They don't control the Supreme Court anymore. | ||
| That's what they did, right, for generations, right, is that they controlled the Supreme Court. | ||
| Whether it was Republican or Democrat president, they were all liberal, left-of-center justices. | ||
| Think about Souter, think about Blackmun, right? | ||
| Think about O'Connor, right? | ||
| Justice Stevens, Justice Kennedy, these are all Republican appointees, right? | ||
| And they were all left-of-center liberal. | ||
| And now that they don't control the Supreme Court anymore, the left is losing it. | ||
| As you said, it used to be a super legislature that used to implement their laws, their policies, that they couldn't get enacted. | ||
| The three Trump justices, why would there be any reason for them to recuse? | ||
| If that's the case, why aren't they calling on Justice Jackson to recuse, since Joe Biden's a candidate, and he's the one triggering and pushing these prosecutions, right? | ||
| We heard that he was upset, right, that Garland hadn't moved faster to prosecute his opponent in the 2024 election. | ||
| Again, the Democrats project that's what they do, right? | ||
| That's what they do. | ||
| They use the law as a weapon against their opponents. | ||
| So, and again, what's your answer? | ||
| You had a clip. | ||
| There's another guy, Ian Millhiser, on Twitter, a big sort of legal lefty analyst. | ||
| What's the answer? | ||
| We need to pack the court. | ||
| What does that mean? | ||
| That means they view the court as not an independent body, but as a tool for their agenda, right? | ||
| Put more liberals on so that we can control the Supreme Court again. | ||
| It ain't going to happen. | ||
| We need to fight hard. | ||
| This is republic ending. | ||
| We're seeing the weaponization of the law like we've never seen before from, you know, Tish James, Alvin Bragg, Fonny Willis down in down in Georgia. | ||
| All of these people have one intent to destroy one person. | ||
| That is so despicable and chilling. | ||
| And so that's what we need to, again, the Jordan report that just came out exposes that this guy Pomerantz, right, has been obsessed with getting this one man using the law, using the criminal laws to destroy a person. | ||
| That is a dictatorship, actually. | ||
| That is the complete opposite of the rule of law. | ||
| This, I want to go over one more time for you, Bounce. | ||
| This liberal is putting it up there on Twitter and they're all backing it. | ||
| They are now, it's no holds barred. | ||
| Even if you thought it was crazy before, because now they realize yesterday was a shock to them. | ||
| An absolute reality check. | ||
| And now they are maniacally focused that they have to destroy the Supreme Court as it exists. | ||
| You had on MSNBC last night calling the current justices criminals. | ||
| Criminals. | ||
| They are going to go after the Supreme Court, and if they steal this on November 5th, they will immediately start the packing. | ||
| You see this in the tweet, and you've seen it all on these TV shows today. | ||
| We told you it was coming. | ||
| That is the tell. | ||
| When they feel like there's a chance for victory to slip away from them, they're immediately going to try to get all of their hoplites I'm fired up that this is all about the Supreme Court and about packing the Supreme Court. | ||
| Mark, where do people go to get your writings? | ||
| Where do they go to get you at CRA? | ||
| What's your social media? | ||
| Thanks, Steve. | ||
| At Mark Palletta is my ex-handle. | ||
| I have a great website, markpalletta.com, that's got tons of articles, op-eds I've written in defending the court, defending President Trump, you know, testimony before Congress. | ||
| And you can check out my book, Created Equal, Clarence Thomas and His Own Words, which is a follow on to the great documentary on Justice Thomas. | ||
| Every American should read this book, watch that movie and read Justice Thomas's memoirs. | ||
| My grandfather's son, he's our greatest living American. | ||
| He's our greatest justice. | ||
| Thank God he's on the Supreme Court. | ||
| And thank God he's willing to take the slings and arrows to do his job as a justice on the Supreme Court. | ||
| It's the Thomas Court. | ||
| That's one of the things that drives them crazy. | ||
| That's where their hatred comes up. | ||
| To have a black man literally be the head of the Supreme Court right now drives them crazy, a conservative. | ||
| He exposes the left's racism. | ||
| For 40 years they've been after him, even before he went on the Supreme Court. | ||
| He's a dear friend. | ||
| He's a great man. | ||
| He's a great justice. | ||
| He's our greatest justice. | ||
| And the American people need to defend him. | ||
| One of the greatest heroes in the history of this country, Mark Pagliotta. | ||
| Great job over at CRA. | ||
| Short commercial break. | ||
| Birchgold.com slash Bann & Go today. | ||
| The end of the dollar empire. | ||
| The fifth free installment. | ||
| Central Bank Digital Currency. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Your host, Stephen K. Bann. | |
| I'll get to this a little bit later, but the reason you should go to Birchgold is that Business Insider, which is no MAGA site, has come out with a huge, their lead story today is about how, wait for this, Warren Posse, because I think you've heard this a couple or three times, How stagflation is actually worse than a recession in that we are beginning a serious, what to say, endeavor into stagflation. | ||
| Now, I say we've been there for a while and you're going to have lost decades. | ||
| Another report out the lowest birth rate in the history of the Republic. | ||
| This country. | ||
| Why? | ||
| Because young people are not looking out and seeing huge opportunities. | ||
| Why? | ||
| What the global elites have done to this economy now, we're adding a trillion dollars every hundred days. | ||
| The first quarter came out of the fiscal year GDP at 1.6%. | ||
| But don't just look at the GDP number. | ||
| That's what we try to get back the numbers here at War Room. | ||
| It is because of massive federal spending when you don't need massive federal spending. | ||
| This is the whole way the system works now. | ||
| I think we calculated there was $800 billion of additional debt raised just to generate $300 billion of growth. | ||
| You take that away, it's negative. | ||
| We're in it now. | ||
| I mean, we're, we're stuck in this thing and Biden and these guys in the house by refusing to shut down the government and force people to the table to have a negotiation. | ||
| And that would be, I'm going to pull out a random name, Polly Pockets Johnson. | ||
| We're in this jam. | ||
| You're going to have the same type of lost decades that the Japanese had after the big asset bubble collapse in the early 1990s. | ||
| And it's going to take some very tough decisions from some very tough people. | ||
| To be able to take the political heat when you have to get this thing sorted like Reagan did with Paul Volcker back in the early 1980s. | ||
| And remember, we were a manufacturing superpower at the time. | ||
| We had virtually no debt on our balance sheet. | ||
| We had a much different working population that were either better craftsmen or really better educated. | ||
| People today are not educated at all. | ||
| In fact, they're anti-educated. | ||
| So we're in it. | ||
| That's why you gotta look about hedges. | ||
| And gold's been one for 8,000 years. | ||
| Just go to birchgold.com. | ||
| I'm trying to get Philip Patrick on the Saturday show. | ||
| Don't know if I'm gonna be able to pull it off, but I'll be going through a lot of capital market stuff. | ||
| But this is zero hedge. | ||
| Oh, and by the way, the inflation number out this morning, we told you once again, it was higher than estimates. | ||
|
unidentified
|
2.8%. | |
| It's not going away. | ||
| And it can't go away. | ||
| Not when you have this massive federal spending. | ||
| Before I turn to, I want to get back into the legal side. | ||
| I'm really, I really love the fact, yesterday we had Jack Ryan on about he and Tammy, and Tammy's a big libertarian. | ||
| Jack's kind of becoming a populist. | ||
| But they had this theory of the case they put forward on the basic why it's better to rent and lease than to own a home. | ||
| I disagree with that for the social aspects. | ||
| I may actually disagree with when we look at the hard numbers on the net present value of the homes. | ||
| But what I love is the audience Actually put forward the bigger case that even on the margins, it may be worse. | ||
| Theoretically, if you do all these net present value calculations and add everything in, maybe it's better to own bonds or stocks over time and you don't get locked into a house. | ||
| The arguments I heard in the chat and on comments up on Getter and Rumble were just fantastic. | ||
| And what really impressed me is the level of sophistication this audience has that no other audience in media has about tough economic questions when he put it forward. | ||
| The response was just incredible. | ||
| I thought that was great. | ||
| War on Posse. | ||
| You get an attaboy. | ||
| Jeff Clark. | ||
| You've been in the middle of this whirlwind. | ||
| You were there in the Trump administration. | ||
| You saw the whirlwinds happening. | ||
| You saw the whole thing with Bill Barr. | ||
| You've seen what's gone on. | ||
| You've been one of the great voices out there. | ||
| Just give us your assessment after you've seen the Supreme Court decision 9-0 on the 14th Amendment. | ||
| You've seen the arguments on Fisher. | ||
| You've seen, and you know J6 as well as anybody, you've seen now these arguments and the complete total meltdown. | ||
| By the Marxist left, and that's what they are, they're Marxist. | ||
| Even the best of them are Neo-Marxist. | ||
| They're complete, because remember, the key thing in Nazi Germany, in the Bolsheviks, is to take over the courts. | ||
| That's what I say, what's happening up in New York is a Moscow show trial, like the show trials in 1935, where you give the performative Potemkin village of all the form of the rule of law, but it's just to get, you know, Stalin, give me the man and I'll give you the crime. | ||
| Your thoughts, sir? | ||
| Sure, Steve. | ||
| So, look, they're in complete meltdown after, as you said, the Colorado case especially, and the case yesterday, the immunity case. | ||
| It's because they live in bubble world. | ||
| They live in their own groupthink. | ||
| I remember, you know, diagnosing this back when I was in college and in law school, when I would have debates with the people on the left who are my classmates, is that they're soft on debate because they're not used to having to defend their positions. | ||
| They're used to being in an echo chamber where everyone just agrees with them. | ||
| And so when you hit them with hard ideas and hard questions and hard facts, and hard legal theories, they tend to recede a little bit, although back in my day, at least, they gave me begrudging respect. | ||
| I think now the colleges and law schools have gotten so bad that you've got a target on your back if you're a conservative. | ||
| You're lucky to get out of there alive. | ||
| So after all of their MSNBC patting themselves on the back about how they've designed the perfect Disqualification theory under the 14th Amendment, Section 3, and how Trump doesn't have any immunity, etc. | ||
| They see the actual arguments unfold and the decision, at least on one of those, come out and, you know, they're flabbergasted. | ||
| They can't believe what they're seeing because they've led their audiences to believe and they've led themselves to believe through their echo chamber that, you know, that President Trump had no chance on these issues. | ||
| And that was, you know, it just shows that they can't discern Lies from the truth anymore. | ||
| They can't discern good arguments from bad legal arguments and they can't even see the weaknesses in their own arguments. | ||
| And that's like the worst kind of feature for a lawyer. | ||
| You need to be able to interrogate your own arguments so that you can beef them up. | ||
| And it seems like they've lost the capacity to do that, Steve. | ||
| You've seen this now, radical talk. | ||
| Before I get to the Jordan report and what's happening at the show trial in Manhattan, because you're one of the guys I've warned about this, they are now brazen. | ||
| They've been pushing this recusal situation and now they're brazen about calling the justices criminal. | ||
| Wait till the immunity decision comes out in June. | ||
| Folks, I can tell you around June 17th, around that second or third week of June before the court punches out, you wait to, I know around the worm, everything around the court is going to have the barriers up, they may put the fences up, you wait for a full and total meltdown when they come back with the immunity decision that kicks it back to Trump and ensures essentially there's no trial of Trump Before the election, they will have a total meltdown. | ||
| This talk about packing the court, this talk about calling justices criminals, how serious is this? | ||
| It's very serious, Steve. | ||
| And look, first, let me say on the security front that the Supreme Court right now should be preparing with the U.S. | ||
| Marshals to protect them. | ||
| You know, we had an attempt on Justice Kavanaugh's life. | ||
| And, uh, you know, he was very muscular yesterday at the oral argument on the immunity case. | ||
| You mentioned, uh, Lavrentiy Beria, you know, find me, uh, show me the man and I'll find you the crime. | ||
| Same thing is, is what Justice Jackson said, which is actually a quotation used, uh, you know, uh, in, to the gist of that at the start of this Jordan report that you're going to talk about. | ||
| And, uh, Scalia observed that in his dissent in Marson v. Olson and Justice Kavanaugh, that's why it came to mind yesterday, He stressed that at oral argument. | ||
| And remember, he was, you know, the chief legal lieutenant for Ken Starr in the independent counsel investigation of the Clintons. | ||
| But he's come to realize that there are serious issues with giving one prosecutor the task of going after a particular person. | ||
| That's not the American system. | ||
| It has all sorts of constitutional dysfunctionality, Steve. | ||
| And so, you know, the fact that the Supreme Court now seems to be, you know, coming around to Justice Scalia's view and Marson v. Olson, Uh, you know, uh, much later than it should have, but it, but it's coming around. | ||
| This is shocking the left. | ||
| And I think it is going to put a lot of security demands, uh, and need for security for the justices. | ||
| And, uh, you know, the, the, it used to be taught in law school, right? | ||
| That the so-called stitch in, in time that saved nine, that Roosevelt's court packing plan was illegitimate. | ||
| And, you know, he, he, he managed through, you know, that kind of threat maybe to change the minds of some of the so-called Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse who were blocking New Deal programs, but they never taught that it was a good idea to pack the court. | ||
| Now, consistent with the drift of academia to the left into true Marxist territory, they're openly saying that they want to pack the court. | ||
| And that is dangerous, Steve, because that means that you would eviscerate that branch, which is the true balancing mechanism, the kind of, you know, the stabilizer that creates equilibrium is that you have the ability to go to the courts. | ||
| And the other two branches, the political branches, can fight with each other there and the people's rights can be protected. | ||
| You'd mentioned, you know, the Soviet system and Russian courts, etc. | ||
| You mean, yes, you know, they had show trials, but we've never had anything like the English and American court system, right? | ||
| The Anglo-Saxon system of justice that the framers learned themselves, oftentimes self-taught, you know, from Blackstone and imported over into the U.S. | ||
| No, we have to eviscerate this. | ||
| I know you never talk about your cases, I don't talk about my cases, but I know you came out of Harvard College, you dedicated your life to the law. | ||
| You have to eviscerate this. | ||
| I want to talk about the weapon. | ||
| I know you never talk about your cases. | ||
| I don't talk about my cases. | ||
| But I know you came out of Harvard College. | ||
| You dedicated your life to the law. | ||
| This is – they've weaponized the entire system at every level to basically make lawyers criminals if you defend this, to destroy lawyers, to take – to tell law firms that if you continue on to have the clients put pressure on the law firms not to do this. | ||
| This entire system right now has been taken over by the most radical. | ||
| Jamie Raskin, he's the most presentable. | ||
| But it's been taken over by absolute radicals. | ||
| Don't wanna see the Rudy Giuliani's, the Jeff Clark's. | ||
| Look out in Arizona, a bunch of lawyers out there. | ||
| They wanna see these people, John Eastman, they wanna see him not just bankrupt and disbarred and try to be humiliated in the legal profession, they wanna see them incarcerated. | ||
| This is, we're fighting the Nazi and the Soviet concept of a legal system to be used to perpetuate power. | ||
| That's where the stakes look. | ||
| This is not my line of country. | ||
| I'm not a lawyer. | ||
| I love talking about economics. | ||
| I don't love talking about this. | ||
| But I can see that this lawfare has got a very strong punch in back of it. | ||
| A lot of weight in back of that punch. | ||
| And they know that. | ||
| They have weaponized the system. | ||
| And now they're in shock that there's actually people who will fight back. | ||
| We do have the Paolettas and the Davises and the Clarks. | ||
| They're people that will fight back, and they are still justices who are heroes who won't be intimidated, that will actually hear based on evidence in a courtroom and decide, and they hate it. | ||
| They called justices of the Supreme Court criminals last night for even having the discussion and asking the questions, Jeff Clark. | ||
| That's right, Steve. | ||
| I thought, you know, perhaps the most remarkable moment yesterday at the argument was when Uh, Justice Katonji Brown Jackson started talking about the White House becoming a crime center. | ||
| Um, you know, like that, that is exactly the kind of comment that comes straight out of like being placed into, uh, MSNBC fluid and marinating, you know, over a year period or being like, you know, uh, steep like wine and all that stuff. | ||
| I mean, it's just not the kind of thing you would ever hear coming from the Supreme Court, uh, before. | ||
| You know, Steve, you're right. | ||
| Look, I don't even think the term lawfare, we got to come up with another term like really gets to it. | ||
| It's more like at this point, you know, we're talking about legal warfare. | ||
| It's like scorched earth legal warfare, right? | ||
| It's not just, you know, lawyers kind of came out of a knightly tradition in England, right? | ||
| So, you know, trial by combat turned to new trial by brief. | ||
| You know, that's kind of system. | ||
| You know, you would send your knights forward, they would send their knights forward, they kind of battle it out, and then everyone returns to civility and balance after that. | ||
| No, they are out to destroy people, just as you're saying. | ||
| I'm one of the targets of that. | ||
| John Eastman's one of the targets of that. | ||
| It is, you know, just as the Sixty-Five Project, which David Brock founded, says... Hang on, hang on, we're going to go to that in a second. | ||
|
unidentified
|
short break. Clarkson News. Here's your host Stephen K. Babb. | |
| Now how do we get it kicked off early in the morning? | ||
| Because we're up quite early to make sure the worm's all set to go and to hit it for the two hours of the morning show. | ||
| And actually to prep also for the afternoon. | ||
| Warpath.coffee slash wormy gets your 15%. | ||
| Discount when you do that, but go to the site, immerse yourself, hear what your compadres are saying about this coffee. | ||
| Whether it's the mild blends, the medium blends, or my beloved dark roast, the Mariner's Roast with the, you know, the very lovely skull and crossbones on it, right? | ||
| I want to thank Tejgi on the team for doing this, for making this, but don't take it from me. | ||
| Go, I think we have over 4,000 comments from people, so go check it out today, see what your compadres are saying. | ||
| I think you will want to give it a shot, and once you give it a shot, you will never go back. | ||
| This is extraordinary coffee. | ||
| I make coffee for reek, and we've worked with these guys for years to make sure that these Tej girls, particularly the dark roast, it's just incredible the time they've taken, the quality, the beans, the roasting process, all of it. | ||
| Roasted here in the United States of America. | ||
| Also, Sacred Human Health. | ||
| Just go to sacredhumanhealth.com and look at what your fellow War Room Posse members are saying about the grass-fed beef liver and the jolt of energy that, according to some people, is life-changing. | ||
| Don't take it from me. | ||
| You're free men and women. | ||
| You've got to make your own decisions. | ||
| Just go check out the site. | ||
| Immerse yourself in information. | ||
| Do it today. | ||
| Jeff Clark. | ||
| Here's what I want to say also about folks, about the Davises and the Clarks and the Paolettas and the Eastmans. | ||
| When the history of this time is written, these are going to be some of the leading heroes because they had every opportunity to crater, they had every opportunity to run away, they had every opportunity to go, you know, protect themselves and not to stand up for principle. | ||
| This is what the comment was made, I think it was in Common Sense by Thomas Paine about Being a, what is it, a summer soldier and a sunshine patriot. | ||
| That it's easy to do it when things are going great. | ||
| It's easy to do it after 16 when we win and all the people, all of a sudden I had two million new best friends. | ||
| Right? | ||
| I didn't have a lot of best friends before that. | ||
| Two million new best friends. | ||
| That's all easy. | ||
| But you saw the same people that ran away in January. | ||
| You know who they are. | ||
| You see it. | ||
| You see it all the time. | ||
| You saw the people, what they tried to do to Trump. | ||
| It's all out there. | ||
| We've chronicled this, but you had a handful of people who happen to be, and I am an intellectual snob. | ||
| When I work with people, meet people, one of my things is to make sure that obviously you've got to have fight and courage because it's critical, but they also have to be incredibly smart, and these folks are incredibly smart, and they saw something. | ||
| They saw a path through this. | ||
| And they were mocked and ridiculed by all the conservatives, and they were really mocked and ridiculed by the people that take the courts as their power base. | ||
| And that is, if you look at MSNBC's people, they look at the courts as the way they control things. | ||
| The faculties, the universities, and the courts. | ||
| That's their two babies. | ||
| Right? | ||
| That's their two babies. | ||
| And they are in shock. | ||
| And they're not going to take it well. | ||
| They're conceiving a million different ways. | ||
| This is why they're already in the mood, already in this thing to not seat Trump. | ||
| Jamie Raskin's project is to take the House by one or two seats and not to seat Trump because they're going to say, hey, according to us, he is an insurrectionist. | ||
| They're plotting every different way to handcuff Trump, upon his victory and not to seed him. | ||
| So if you think this thing is forgotten, that's why people are saying, Steve, why are you saying Magritte? | ||
| Because we got to be at the ramparts every day. | ||
| These people are not going to give up control of the courts. | ||
| They're not going to give up control of this country. | ||
| Look at what's happened. | ||
| Look at people go, wow, this all came out of nowhere. | ||
| How did this all come? | ||
| It didn't come out of nowhere. | ||
| They've been working on this project for decades and decades and decades. | ||
| They took over the education system. | ||
| Look at what's going on at the universities, the merger of the progressive left and the Sharia supremacists. | ||
| Does that look good to you? | ||
| Is that a good look? | ||
| USC, how you doing? | ||
| Is that the parents out there? | ||
| And all you big donors, you've been underwriting it. | ||
| I don't want to hear all the whining now. | ||
| You've been underwriting this, this radicalization. | ||
| And I hope it comes home to roost on this, on Saturday, when you're not there to graduation, been canceled, all these graduations are going to be canceled. | ||
| They're forcing their will on you. | ||
| Like they forced their will until Trump came along. | ||
| And it is irony of irony in New York court, what are they, the charges there are very bizarre. | ||
| I came in and we filed this closely and I talked to all these lawyers. | ||
| I can't figure out actually what the charge is, but essentially they're arguing. | ||
| That Hillary Clinton, who would have packed the court. | ||
| Remember, Garland was her guy. | ||
| In fact, she didn't even come to Garland's defense. | ||
| They wanted to have even a more radical, maybe Larry Tribe or something like that, even a more radical than Garland. | ||
| The court would have been gone. | ||
| The country would have been gone. | ||
| They're arguing now in a New York court. | ||
| Their argument is Trump, it's election fraud in 2016, I think. | ||
| It's some, this bizarre, you know, Trump through the 2016 election and it's election fraud. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Huh? | |
| What? | ||
| What? | ||
| They just make up stuff. | ||
| That's why you got to read this report. | ||
| Grace, I want to get up there. | ||
| It's 300 pages long. | ||
| You get a big pot of Warpath coffee. | ||
| I mean a big one, maybe a thermos. | ||
| And if you're out in, if it's spring, if you're in that part of the country or if it's, you know, out west, up in the Pacific Northwest, it's coming maybe a little late. | ||
| You sit out, you get a big pot of Warpath coffee at warpath.coffee.com, get your 15% discount. | ||
| You take the 300-page report, and it's only interim, and you start reading it, flipping through it, making your notes. | ||
| This is just one small aspect of this vast conspiracy. | ||
| This goes to the, this goes to the bar associations. | ||
| This goes what happened to Eastman. | ||
| This happened in Arizona with an AG that with 208 votes, she leads. | ||
| There's 9,000 ballots they haven't counted because they refuse to have them counted. | ||
| You've got the amazing Julie Kelly's going to join me tomorrow. | ||
| We're going to go back through her amazing analysis of the phony classified documents in the, in the coordination between the national archives. | ||
| This is a vast, vast, Vast criminal conspiracy against President Trump, against MAGA, against Republicans, and against the United States of America. | ||
| And Johnson better get off his ass and get on top of things. | ||
| It shouldn't take war room to force this report out. | ||
| Do you think they wrote this report in 48 hours after we started banging on judiciary? | ||
| Jim Jordan has wanted to go forward. | ||
| We've been banging on Congressman Jordan not doing enough. | ||
| He's wanted to go forward. | ||
| His staff has wanted to go forward. | ||
| They want to get more aggressive. | ||
| They're being held back by Johnson. | ||
| And my question to the people around the president, did Johnson fully brief the president when he came out and said 100% support him? | ||
| Did he fully brief him how he was personally suppressing this investigation against this vast criminal conspiracy? | ||
| Full stop. | ||
| I want that question answered. | ||
| Did he tell the president, yes, I have made a decision to suppress this because the donors want me to suppress it, because they don't want Trump to be found innocent. | ||
| They support the vast criminal conspiracy against Donald J. Trump. | ||
| Full stop. | ||
| This is repulsive. |
Export Selection