April 27, 2024 - Bannon's War Room
48:02
| 
| 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. | ||
| Okay, welcome to the Six O'Clock Show. | ||
| I want to thank Real America's Voice. | ||
| I want to thank the team down at Palm Beach at the studio. | ||
| Natalie, great show. | ||
| Mo Bannett, Captain Bannett, has been representing War Room and myself in Hungary for the last couple of days. | ||
| CPAC Hungary, another great event. | ||
| They allowed me to do a short talk that we did by video to tee her up. | ||
| Great speech, Mo. | ||
| I have not yet begun to fight. | ||
| I know you were there on the day of Viktor Orban. | ||
| Just give us your, put us in the room, give us a sense of the community that's coming around what I call the sovereignty movement or the populist nationalist movement. | ||
| What was the feel at this CPAC Hungary? | ||
| The feeling was a lot of camaraderie. | ||
| As we saw there, There were many leaders from not only Europe, but South America and also the United States. | ||
| And the main theme that we saw in everyone's speeches was that we cannot let the globalists win. | ||
| We cannot let the left, globalists, liberals win in any of our countries. | ||
| We must continue to fight. | ||
| For sovereignty and for conservatism in each one of our countries. | ||
| We cannot let those on the left, the globalists, win and destroy our countries. | ||
| Mo, how big did they take the American presidential election? | ||
| The House, obviously, the third of the Senate, but particularly the President in November. | ||
| How big is, in this movement, how much weight are they putting on what? | ||
| Because I know they have the European parliamentary elections in June, which are important, and we're covering it wall-to-wall, but how big is the center of gravity of our fight here in the United States? | ||
| It's extremely, extremely important to those Members here in Hungary and across Europe, because they know, they've seen what's happened under Joe Biden in the last few years. | ||
| And if Donald Trump does not get back in the White House, they see what is going to happen, not only for the United States, but for all of our relationships across Europe. | ||
| So it is extremely important, not only for their parliamentary elections here in Hungary, but also for our presidential election in November. | ||
| They understand that we must, must have Donald Trump back in the White House. | ||
| You had a quick meeting. | ||
| I know you met with the Bolsonaros. | ||
| Tell us, any update on Brazil? | ||
| Because they're coming on Bolsonaro, the ex-president. | ||
| It was stolen from him, but they're coming down on him hard. | ||
| I know Eduardo was there. | ||
| Any updates from Brazil? | ||
| So they are going to continue to fight. | ||
| They're not going to let down. | ||
| And as of right now, we are tracking that CPAC will also have an event in Brazil in the next few months over the summer. | ||
| So we will know more about that in the next few weeks, but the Bolsonaro's are going to continue to fight. | ||
| In fact, I think we're sending you and the team to Brazil and to Mexico if we can commit, if we, if Lula let, either A, let Abandon in the country, or more importantly, let you out of the country. | ||
| Mo, what's your social media? | ||
| How do folks keep up to date with going? | ||
| By the way, Ben Burquam, tomorrow, Saturday, we're going to do the Freedom Conference they're having in Romania. | ||
| Ben will join us. | ||
| Mo and the team are coming back. | ||
| We've got a lot of work to do here. | ||
| Where do people get you on social media? | ||
| They can find me on Twitter and Getter at Maureen underscore Bannon and also on Instagram at real Maureen Bannon. | ||
| And I will proudly represent the war room at all CPACs across the world, as long as I'm let in and out of the country. | ||
| Yeah, maybe easier to get you in than get you out. | ||
| Okay, Captain Bannon, continue on in your networking over there. | ||
| Thank you for doing this and great speech. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Remember, Dr. Kevin Roberts lit him up at the World Economic Forum in Davos. | ||
| He threw down and told Davos, man, hey, no offense. | ||
| I look around at all the world's problems and you're the cause of most of it. | ||
| They were kind of shocked. | ||
| We're going to see if he gets an invite next year. | ||
| I got a cold open for Dr. Roberts, who joins us from Heritage. | ||
| Let's go ahead and play it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
President's bid to return to the White House. | |
| He's been laying the groundwork for what another term in office might look like. | ||
| Primarily, how he plans to execute his goal of overhauling the federal government and rid Washington of the so-called deep state. | ||
| CNN's Kyung Ah investigated some of the former president's promises and the impact they may have. | ||
| Here's what she found. | ||
| At every 2024 campaign rally for former President Donald Trump, he makes a vow. | ||
| We will demolish the deep state. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The deep state is his named enemy. | |
| Federal workers, who Trump believes conspire against him. | ||
| Here's my plan to dismantle the deep state and reclaim our democracy from Washington corruption. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Trump's 10-point plan in his campaign website outlines sweeping changes he wants to make to government agencies. | |
| Faceless bureaucrats will never again be able to target and persecute conservatives. | ||
| Christians or the left's political enemies. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The end result would erase federal worker protections that have been in place for more than 140 years, eliminate entire departments, and consolidate power around Trump. | |
| To understand the impact of what could happen in Trump's second term, you only have to look at his first. | ||
| I will immediately reissue my 2020 executive order restoring the president's authority to remove rogue bureaucrats. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That executive order he signed just before losing the 2020 election turns government jobs into political appointments, giving the Trump administration the power to fire employees at will and replace them with loyalists, making them, according to this federal report, subject to removal for partisan political reasons. | |
| Do you want people doing scientific research at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission who don't have the qualifications to perform that kind of work? | ||
| Their only qualification is an allegiance to the Trump agenda. | ||
| Jacqueline Simon represents a large government employee union. | ||
| She says the expertise of government workers can't be replaced on a political whim. | ||
| Once that kind of stuff is politicized, let's say you deny a disability claim based on somebody's politics. | ||
| How do you feel as you think about what the federal workforce could look like? | ||
| It's very disheartening and it's scary. | ||
| I think that there will be a massive exodus of competence. | ||
| I do think that this is in part an effort to weaponize the bureaucracy. | ||
| Lifelong Republican Robert Shea was a political appointee under President George W. Bush. | ||
| He believes politics should be kept out of the federal workforce no matter who is in the White House. | ||
| I would expect to see wide swaths of civil servants removed from their positions and replaced with people more loyal to President Trump. | ||
| Do you read this as a loyalty test? | ||
| I do. | ||
| These documents obtained by the National Treasury Employees Union show the Trump administration plan to cut deep. | ||
| One agency proposing almost 70% of his positions should become political appointments by claiming they deal with policy. | ||
| IT specialist, data management, budget information support manager. | ||
| We read the jobs list to former Obama-era OMB official Kenneth Baer. | ||
| So why would you make all these positions political appointees? | ||
| Because that's what they want to destroy, the independent, objective civil service. | ||
| That's why. | ||
| I think it would really fundamentally weaken the American government, but also American democracy, if we got rid of that career staff. | ||
| The deep state must and will be brought to heel. | ||
| But that's only part of what Trump appears to have in store. | ||
| Move parts of the sprawling federal bureaucracy to new locations outside the Washington swamp, to places filled with patriots who love America. | ||
| This goes on. | ||
| CNN actually did a good job in presenting it in a very political way. | ||
| Dr. Kevin Roberts. | ||
| Uh, who is kind of the head of the 20 project 2025. | ||
| You know, since we started talking about this, I think over a year ago, I don't think it's any project or any endeavor on an outside group that we've brought up except for maybe the precinct strategy that. | ||
| Causes them almost a deep traumatic response. | ||
| Why is that, doctor? | ||
| Because they they always spin it with lies. | ||
| But what is the trauma? | ||
| You can tell they've got when they mention this, they go to like PTSD. | ||
| Why is Project 2025, which is just to take the three thousand appointees any president gets and make sure people are trained and curate and the best people can get in there. | ||
| Why is even the ability to do that cause fear in the hearts of all of D.C.? ? | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's glorious to see the trauma, Steve, and it happens for two or three reasons. | |
| The first is they know we're over the target. | ||
| It's taken us decades, but we've figured out that even more important than particular elected officials in Congress, obviously the elected official known as the president's the most important, that the people who are actually running the government against the interests of the everyday American are these unelected bureaucrats. | ||
| And, you know, I'm Certainly guilty of this. | ||
| I'm not pointing fingers at anyone elsewhere. | ||
| For most of my professional career, I just didn't realize the extent of that problem. | ||
| You were probably the first mover in this, right? | ||
| But the second is, we actually have a plan. | ||
| I mean, they can't believe that the conservative movement, the sovereignty movement, whatever you want to call it in the United States, actually has gotten organized enough to bring together Every group that matters, that actually does something rather than just talk about doing something and present a plan. | ||
| And then the third is, and this is also equally surprising to them, it's extraordinarily bold. | ||
| And so I agree with CNN, believe it or not, when they say we need to keep politics out of government jobs. | ||
| That's the precise reason for Project 2025 is to get the politics out of government jobs. | ||
| Talk to me about, because they're saying they're there, they destroyed the U.S. | ||
| government, it's all the U.S. | ||
| government. | ||
| There's a difference between having our government, which is the apparatus around our republic, and the administrative state. | ||
| This thing has metastasized the administrative state and the rogue element, the deep state. | ||
| But can you just compare and contrast for audience the difference between actually having a functioning government and what has metastasized into this administrative state? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I will. | |
| And in fact, I'll do this following your lead with this question, which is instrumental because it is crucial. | ||
| People may hear the framing of CNN or some of the commentary of their guests and think, well, gosh, you know, Project 2025 or President Trump want to get rid of competence in the government. | ||
| That sounds terrible. | ||
| In fact, what we're trying to do is get rid of incompetence and terrible political partisan bias that, to the point of your question, have become commonplace over the last several decades. | ||
| In other words, to be succinct about it, Steve, what we're trying to do is just hit a reset, which is to say that for those of us who understand that there is, of course, a place for the executive branch, And we understand, therefore, there is a place for a handful of federal government employees. | ||
| We simply want to get back to not just a much smaller number of government employees, but most importantly, to two things. | ||
| First of all, if you work in the executive branch, just like if you work in another company or in a nonprofit, say at Heritage, You work for the president of that organization. | ||
| That's really common sense for Americans, and it's in the best interest of that president, the best interest of that organization, in this case, the federal government, to hire people who are extremely competent at their jobs. | ||
| There just needs to be fewer of them. | ||
| But the second point, I would argue, is equally important. | ||
| And that is, at the origin of the administrative state becoming so large and so powerful and so unaccountable is political cowardice. | ||
| And it's political cowardice by the main branch, the first branch of the U.S. | ||
| government, and that's Congress. | ||
| The administrative state and all of its abuses is a creation of members of Congress over many decades in both parties, frankly. | ||
| Who have simply given away the accountability, given away the authority that they properly have in the Constitution to these unelected bureaucrats so that they themselves would not have to be politically accountable for what happens. | ||
| It is time, in essence, and to sum up here, for the United States to get back to a proper role for the executive branch, and that's really all this is. | ||
| I want to, before I go on to some other topics, I want to make sure because we pride ourselves in immersing or giving access for the posse to immerse themselves in information. | ||
| On Project 2025, you've got this amazing 900 page policy book, but I want people to get access to all of it because you're not trying to play hide the football in any of this. | ||
| So where do people go to find out more about the truth about what's actually going on? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Project2025.org. | |
| You can see every word of the document there. | ||
| If you're so inspired, you can, as 10,000 other Americans have already done, submit your resume to work in the next administration. | ||
| The whole point of this project, as you say so well, Steve, isn't to hide the football. | ||
| Quite the opposite. | ||
| It's to be so totally transparent, which comes out of the complete confidence we have and these eternal principles and policies That it actually, even beyond just the work itself, which is explained at project2025.org, actually becomes an inspiration for Americans to believe that maybe, just maybe, we might have a decade or more of real great policies that also the administrative state can be part of. | ||
| It's what MAGA stands for, so everybody go there today. | ||
| Project2025.org. | ||
| It is incredible, the amount of tools they give you, the information. | ||
| Okay, two things. | ||
| You talk about counters. | ||
| I want to talk about what I call this red-green merger, the radical, what's happening on the university campus, driven by this faculty, and I got to talk about my favorite topic, Ukraine. | ||
| Let's start with the college campuses. | ||
| This is one of the most serious, I say it's the most anti-American movement I've ever seen. | ||
| The radical Marxists left with these Sharia supremacists. | ||
| Give us, you come from academia, give us your, I say the problem's in the faculty senate and in the administration. | ||
| The kids are a symptom of the problem. | ||
| Your thoughts, sir? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, a couple of things. | |
| The first is just it comes from experience. | ||
| You know, 20 years ago or so, I was a young history professor at a major university in the Southwest on the tenure track, everything going well professionally. | ||
| And I realized something. | ||
| I mean, I saw the following in graduate school, but I realized, I guess, the pervasiveness of this something. | ||
| And that was these people are crazy. | ||
| The faculty members, my colleagues, they actually hate America. | ||
| And the story that I'll convey that I think your audience will appreciate is in the year that President Reagan died, My colleagues in this history department decided they were going to hold a symposium that would assess Reagan's legacy. | ||
| Of course, I was the only Christian conservative member of this faculty, and I was not yet tenured. | ||
| So I was taking a big risk by doing the following, and I said, well, there are four of you talking about his legacy. | ||
| I'm going to volunteer to be part of this symposium. | ||
| So the only other person on the faculty I could get to join me wasn't even a conservative. | ||
| He was a libertarian economist. | ||
| And he said, Kevin, I gotta help you out here, brother. | ||
| I'm going to join this symposium. | ||
| They cancelled it. | ||
| They could take on an untenured history professor four to one, but they couldn't take on two of us challenging them. | ||
| That's the point. | ||
| Even though they have run roughshod over these institutions, and it's terrible, trust me. | ||
| I think it's the worst thing. | ||
| It's the most horrific problem we have to face in the United States. | ||
| Ultimately, if they are matched by just a small handful of people, particularly university presidents, And that leads me to the second quick point, Steve. | ||
| And that is I was asked yesterday by some friends in Austin about my alma mater, the University of Texas, where the president I think has acquitted himself well. | ||
| And they said, Kevin, if you were president of the University of Texas, something I don't aspire to be, they said, how would you handle the faculty who signed the letter who said that they support the even violent protests of some of these activists? | ||
| And I said, fire them. | ||
| And their response was, well, what about tenure? | ||
| And I said, you see, that's exactly the point. | ||
| It is past time in this country to realize that these academics have taken over our institutions. | ||
| That's bad enough. | ||
| But what makes it worse, what completely aggravates the problem, once again, is cowardice. | ||
| Cowardice of university presidents, cowardice of boards of regents, cowardice of state legislators and governors and so So many states who just look the other way. | ||
| And if, in addition to Project 2025 and the administrative state, if we have a chance of taking back this country, it isn't just going to be in elections. | ||
| It isn't just going to be in the halls of administrative agencies in D.C. | ||
| It is going to start in the halls of our universities, where the taxpayers and common sense people say, we've had enough. | ||
| You're not doing this on our dime, teaching our kids and grandkids to hate this country we love. | ||
| What would you tell the donors? | ||
| A lot of the donors come to me and they say they're going to cut off the donations. | ||
| I know a lot of these guys, particularly some of the hedge fund guys, we're going to cut off the donations. | ||
| I say that's not good enough. | ||
| You guys have kind of underwritten this for decades and decades and decades and you wanted to look the other way. | ||
| What would you tell donors they have to do with the money? | ||
| What would be the Dr. Kevin Roberts plan of actually taking on this problem? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, you're very right. | |
| It's not enough just to turn off the spigot, although that's good that more people are doing that, it's that you actually need to pool the money. | ||
| Because keep in mind, the other side is always better resourced than we are. | ||
| And you need to invest it in new institutions. | ||
| You need to invest it in fellowships and centers at places that actually are relatively conservative. | ||
| Heritage can help you with that. | ||
| I'm not asking for Heritage to get that money. | ||
| I want to direct that money to new institutions of higher learning that actually are standing as bulwarks against this nonsense. | ||
| But I want to go one step farther if I may and say Just the money isn't enough. | ||
| Just turning off the spigot isn't enough. | ||
| Even doing what I just said and helping new institutions like the University of Austin, Hillsdale College, the number of colleges like the one that I led, Wyoming Catholic College, who don't take federal student loans and grants. | ||
| We have to do a third thing that a lot of members of the donor class find a little distasteful. | ||
| And that's calling in the chits that they have, because they might also be political donors to governors, to members of state legislatures, and saying, I want a majority of the Board of Regents of that school or that university system to be comfortable taking over that institution, just like what DeSantis did with New College. | ||
| If we stop short of that step, we're missing the most important lesson about this march through the institution by the left and that is we can't compromise with them we have to go to battle and take back these schools. Governor DeSantis and Rufo on New College, brilliant move. | ||
| Today, all the news coming out from the economy slowing down, of the massive overspending, Keynesian infusion only getting us 1.6% growth, a total disaster. | ||
| But on top of that, reports our defense budget is going to a trillion dollars in this budget cycle, and we're still doing $100 billion supplements, particularly to Ukraine. | ||
| You've been one of the leaders in the rational Talk to me about your thoughts right now. | ||
| Where do we stand? | ||
|
unidentified
|
You know, in short, before I get into some details about how bad the situation is, we completely continue to fail miserably at prioritizing our interests. | |
| By that, Steve, I mean prioritizing our interests abroad. | ||
| Taiwan, frankly, if they're invaded by the Chinese Communist Party, is a much bigger direct threat to us than whatever happens to Ukraine, even though I definitely want the Ukrainians to win. | ||
| But secondly, priorities internally. | ||
| I mean, to your point about the defense budget going to a trillion dollars, it may be that a trillion dollars is the right amount of money. | ||
| It may be that 25 percent less than that is the right amount of money. | ||
| How would we know? | ||
| Because the lack of conversation in Congress, born out of this political cowardice, doesn't allow us to have those conversations. | ||
| I'll give you one example from a recent trip that I took to Taiwan. | ||
| It's so apparent to me and to the military experts at Heritage that the huge investments we're making in the United States military Might actually be the wrong ones. | ||
| We clearly need to build more ships, something I think you would appreciate. | ||
| But the thing that's happening is that we're not investing in the new weapon systems that actually will be the next round of warfare. | ||
| And why is that, Steve? | ||
| Not just because of the political cowardice in Congress about even having this conversation, but because the companies that get enriched by this are blocking the new entrance with all of the innovations into the business, which leads me to Ukraine. | ||
| What, in fact, is the strategy for ending the war? | ||
| Has President Biden said so? | ||
| Has my friend Mike Johnson said so? | ||
| The best answer that I can get from all of these advocates for continuing to spend a ridiculous amount of money in a war that Ukraine does not have a sufficient number of soldiers to win is to get the Russians out. | ||
| That's not going to happen. | ||
| I lament that. | ||
| I mean, for those of you who are proponents of spending money on Ukraine, don't shoot the messenger. | ||
| But the reality is they don't have the men. | ||
| We've been terrible at even delivering the munitions with it, we suppose. | ||
| And all of this points to the same problem here, which is that all of this is a symptom of a republic that May be in decline. | ||
| And if it isn't yet in decline, we're close to it because we continue to do ridiculous things that bear very little fruit. | ||
| And in fact, a lot of the fruit is very rotten. | ||
| So to sum up here, there's only one thing that's going to fix this. | ||
| And that is for conservative members of the House and the Senate to listen to the popular will. | ||
| Three quarters of the American people say we've spent too much money on Ukraine. | ||
| And the interesting thing is, it's not that they want Ukraine to lose, it's that they expect our policy makers to put their interests first. | ||
| Say, for example, by doing what the Speaker told us he promised us he would do in January, which is not even have a conversation about Ukraine until we had secured the southern border. | ||
| Something that obviously has not happened. | ||
| Dr. Roberts, in conclusion, you know, a majority of the majority did vote against it, the 112. | ||
| Would you recommend that what we need to do now, because I'm talking to guys working on the budget process, and there's going to be another $20, $30, $40 billion. | ||
| I mean, it's like Afghanistan all over again. | ||
| There's going to be another $40 billion minimum in this cycle for Ukraine in this year, coming year. | ||
| Would you say it's time now that we have to enforce like the War Powers Act? | ||
| Does Congress have to force the Biden regime to come forward and actually lay out the plan to the American people of exactly what we're trying to accomplish there? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| And on that point, Steve, I would make an appeal to conservative friends in both chambers who have voted for the Ukraine funding by saying, at the very least, men and women, we have to agree that the Constitution is being trampled over by this president. | ||
| But even beyond that, just in terms of military strategy, in terms of business and corporate strategy, how could you make such a large investment without understanding what the endgame is? | ||
| And what I'm hopeful about, Steve, and actually pretty hopeful, not just cautiously optimistic, is that people realize the game is up, that, in fact, we must have, with this level of investment in Ukraine, close to $200 billion now, a — we must have a pressure campaign on President Biden to tell us what the endgame is. | ||
| I know that's where President Trump's mind is. | ||
| I suspect that this will be an election year issue that cuts his way very favorably because the majority of the American people are asking that same question. | ||
| The question, though, this year is, will Washington listen? | ||
| Dr. Roberts, where do they go to get all your information? | ||
| Social media? | ||
| Go to Heritage? | ||
| Where do people go to immerse themselves this weekend in all the information over there? | ||
|
unidentified
|
For the foundational stuff, come to Heritage.org. | |
| For the action, go to HeritageAction.com. | ||
| You can follow me on X at KevinRobertsTX. | ||
| And even though we've got a lot of problems to fix, Steve, with what you're doing, most of all what people in your audience are doing, I'm really optimistic we're going to turn the corner this year and enter a new era of golden reform in the United States. | ||
| Same, same. | ||
| I like the people on our side of the football. | ||
| Last question real quick. | ||
| Has your invitation for Davos for next year arrived yet, sir? | ||
|
unidentified
|
It hasn't arrived yet, and I really don't know what I would do if, in fact, it comes my way. | |
| But I had a lot of fun, so I might just say yes. | ||
| You've got to go back. | ||
| Let's let him on fire. | ||
| Dr. Kevin Roberts, head of Heritage, thank you so much, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thanks, sir. | |
| Take care. | ||
| So they got to go to Heritage this weekend, particularly go to Project 2025. | ||
| You got all the policy information, but they got tons of stuff over there, too, particularly some of the background about this whole thing on the War Powers Act, Ukraine, all of it. | ||
| So make sure you go over to Heritage. | ||
| Check it out. | ||
| Birchgold.com. | ||
| I've got the fifth free installment. | ||
| I'll talk about a lot tomorrow morning on the show. | ||
| Break it down. | ||
| Central Bank digital currency. | ||
| That's what the Fed spending their time on besides funding these massive deficits. | ||
| Go to birchgold.com slash Bannon right now. | ||
| Talk to Philip Patrick and team, but get the fifth free installment and do it today. | ||
| Short break. | ||
| Jeremy Carl next. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All this nonsense, all this spin, they can't handle the truth. | |
| War Room Battleground with Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Okay, Jeremy Carl now joins us. | ||
| An extremely controversial book. | ||
| The Unprotected Class, How Anti-White Racism Is Tearing America Apart. | ||
| Jeremy Carl now joins us. | ||
| First off, why has this book caused such consternation, Jeremy? | ||
| You've been on Tucker, you've been all over the big shows. | ||
| The pundits, let's say they maybe are not MAGA, are tearing their hair out about this. | ||
| What is so controversial about your book? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I think, Steve, it's the race that dare not speak its name. | |
| I mean, it's really putting, it's not kind of euphemizing and talking about woke or, you know, critical race theory, but it's really just saying, look, what we're doing here is anti-white. | ||
| It's racist. | ||
| It needs to stop. | ||
| And there are a lot of people invested in our current racist and discriminatory system who are absolutely wanting us to not have that conversation. | ||
| But I think there's a tremendous desire to have it. | ||
| I mean, the Tucker episode you just mentioned went up 36 hours ago. | ||
| It's been viewed over 47 million. | ||
| times that stream. It has been his most popular stream he's done since his Putin interview. | ||
| So I think there is a tremendous appetite among normal people to actually have this conversation but it leads of course to no one's account. | ||
| But Joanne Reed would tell us that's how many racists there are in America and the world. | ||
| There's a lot of racists. | ||
| There's a lot of hate. | ||
| And naturally, Tucker's going to put up Jeremy Carl. | ||
| Jeremy Carl's brilliant. | ||
| He's an academic. | ||
| He knows how to hide his racism about academic research. | ||
| I mean, the argument they're going to say, I got it. | ||
| There's a lot of racists and they're looking for more Jeremy Carl's material. | ||
| Your response, sir? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I mean, I think Joy is pretty self-discrediting. | |
| I mean, I'm sure that she'll take a shot at this at some point. | ||
| I'm actually surprised I haven't seen anything yet from her. | ||
| But yeah, I mean, like, the actual reality is, of course, when you challenge power, Steve, and you know this really well from your own career, they're going to come after you with everything. | ||
| And so I'm not expecting mercy from the left. | ||
| I'm not expecting a fair fight. | ||
| And I came in here with guns blazing kind of understanding. | ||
| The stakes of this battle and I think the case I make in the unprotected class speaks for itself. | ||
| I've got almost a thousand references and let's discuss it. | ||
| I'm not afraid of that conversation. | ||
| How can you have, and by the way, I think to your, I think to your credit about the power of the book, and I'm not saying I agree with your argument or don't, but the power of the book is that they're not highlighting it. | ||
| The reason they're not highlighting it, they don't want to give it any more oxygen. | ||
| But how can you, how can you say that there's anti-white racism? | ||
| I thought, I thought you couldn't be, you could, that if you're white, you're essentially are racist. | ||
| And if you're anti-white, that's not really racism. | ||
| Why do you say the anti-white part of it's racism? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, let me give you a couple different examples, because I think implicitly what you're sort of drawing on there is the left-wing notion that racism is prejudice plus power. | |
| And of course, nobody who's not white has power, and therefore you can't be racist. | ||
| So, I mean, A, I just kind of disagree with the premise. | ||
| B, I disagree with who has power right now. | ||
| But I'd say kind of even more broadly, when we look at it, I'll just give you two quick examples from this book. | ||
| I'd originally wanted to call this book, It's Okay to be White. | ||
| And I actually got the editorial staff to be comfortable with that, but then the sales staff came back and said, you know, hey, we can't sell that book with that title to Walmart and Costco. | ||
| And of course, is it not OK to be white? | ||
| I mean, it's certainly OK to be Asian. | ||
| It's OK to be African American. | ||
| It's OK to be Hispanic. | ||
| But when some people put up signs near university campuses a few years ago, which is where I got the title saying it's OK to be white, that was seen as a huge racist provocation. | ||
| So I think that says a lot about kind of white privilege. | ||
| The second thing we have that's really empirical that we can look at is the huge flight from whiteness that we've had In kind of how we talk about our census, if you can identify yourself when you're applying for a job or a university position or anything else similar as something other than white, you do that. | ||
| And we have tons of information from the census, tons of information from job application data, all these things I talk about in the book that show that really like what you want to be right now in the system is anything other than white. | ||
| How did, okay, so how did this evolve? | ||
| How did we get to this place right there? | ||
| How did we get to a place that you had the flight from being white, from even being proud of being white, or as people should be proud of being African American, or whatever ethnicity they are, whatever religion. | ||
| Why, how did we get to a place where people, by the system, are not supposed to be proud of their heritage, their race, and their ethnicity? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, Steve, I think it's a great question. | |
| There's a couple of things that are at play there. | ||
| I think some of it starts with... | ||
| The follow-ons from the Civil Rights Act. | ||
| And I think I'm not one of these people who kind of feels the need to re-litigate the Civil Rights Act of 1964. | ||
| I think it addressed some real problems. | ||
| It was kind of a blunt instrument. | ||
| But I think the way that the administrative states subsequently, the deep states, seized on that and extended it, and then you had dubious Supreme Court decisions. | ||
| So that really built a kind of infrastructure in which you get things like disparate impact, which comes from a Supreme Court case, Griggs v. Duke Power, which kind of says, Basically, if you have a hiring process, even if there's no discriminatory intent, but you kind of wind up with a racially unequal kind of outcome that it can be presumptively illegal. | ||
| You've got to sort of show all these things that you've done or that it's a business necessity to prove that it's okay. | ||
| And most companies don't even want to bother. | ||
| And so they just cave in without even being seen. | ||
| The other thing, and Steve, this will be something near and dear to both of our hearts. | ||
| is immigration. | ||
| And so you have in 1965, you have the Hartzeller Immigration Act. | ||
| And we went from basically being a predominantly white 85 plus percent and 10% African American at the time and tiny amounts of anything else, country to a country that is now 58% white, a majority non-white among our children, and the just the ethnic politics, the ethnic dynamics, the racial dynamics have just changed and so that has led opportunities for the left to create all sorts of mischief. | ||
| Was that the passage of that because I tell people all the time that that bill was one of the most, had one of the most profound impacts in this nation's history. | ||
| Did that give fuel to, did the administrative state use that as fuel for its own growth, the way it metastasized to kind of become this unconstitutional fourth branch of government that we are dedicated to take apart? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Absolutely. | |
| And I know you had Kevin Roberts on from Heritage earlier, and he's focused on this with Project 2025, and quite appropriately, I've been a little involved in it myself. | ||
| I think the administrative state absolutely seized on this. | ||
| I mean, you have a Civil Rights Department, of the U.S. | ||
| Department of Justice. | ||
| And under a president like Trump, who really works at it really hard to try to bring some balance, it's only left-wing, right, like, on a net basis. | ||
| And any time a Democrat is in office, it's just extreme far left-wing, because that's pretty much all of the so-called professional employees who are, of course, in fact, all political activists, to a first approximation. | ||
| They're in that and they've taken these things and they've run with it. | ||
| And the left is expert at manipulating these rules, Steve, as you know. | ||
| And on the right, we are constantly playing catch up. | ||
| We are constantly not tough enough. | ||
| We're not willing to kind of detonate the nuclear button against these guys. | ||
| And again, I hope with Project 2025 and some of these other things that you certainly pushed over the years that we're getting more serious about that. | ||
| Is, because they're going to pick that up, that'll be on Joanne Reed, that, you know, Project 2025 is a cover for a bunch of racists like Jeremy Carl, a bunch of white nationalists. | ||
| Is, in confronting what some of these problems are, what you call tearing apart America, is by definition, people that do that, are they racist? | ||
|
unidentified
|
You mean the folks on the other side you're talking about who are doing this? | |
| No, no, no, no, no, no. | ||
| People that would say, yes, I agree, Jeremy's right, that we've got to fight back on this. | ||
| This anti-white racism is tearing the country apart. | ||
| I want to figure out how we can stop this and not tear the country apart. | ||
| Wouldn't the left say, by definition, anybody that buys into that program is, by definition, to them, a racist? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I think so, Steve. | |
| They will certainly say that. | ||
| But I mean, I go back, I remember you gave some comments, I may have been in France, somewhere in Europe in around 2018, where you basically said, look, if they're not calling you a racist, Or xenophobe or everything else. | ||
| You're just, you're not there. | ||
| You're not kind of doing your job. | ||
| You're not being a serious challenge or threat to them. | ||
| So I kind of take that as a badge of honor. | ||
| My conscience is clean. | ||
| You know, I know the motivations I had in writing this. | ||
| And in many ways it is to, I mean, I didn't write it as a de-radicalizing book. | ||
| I just wrote it to write the truth. | ||
| But my hope is, you know, in kind of offering Realistic political solutions to some of our problems and to say, hey, you know, we don't need to the solution here is not a white ethnostate or white nationalist or to kind of repay their racism with racism on our own terms. | ||
| Actually, if we if we embrace the sorts of things I'm talking about, we are going to reduce racism in society. | ||
| So that's kind of my approach. | ||
| Yeah, what I said in France is that when they start calling you a racist, when they start calling you a xenophobe, when they start calling you a nativist, remember, they've run out of logical arguments to combat you and they've got to go to name calling. | ||
| Once they go to name calling, you've got them. | ||
| This was Hillary Clinton in the 26th campaign when she came out and said, Steve Bannon's all right. | ||
| I sat there with the team. | ||
| I said, if that's her line of attack, Given where the country is and what jobs are and what the working class in this country say, hey, I need it. | ||
| We're the manufacturing jobs. | ||
| We fight on economic populism and economic nationalism. | ||
| And that's she fights. | ||
| We'll beat her every time. | ||
| And he can. | ||
| This is hopefully one of the lessons. | ||
| What is a protected class and an unprotected class for our audience? | ||
| Just the basics. | ||
| What is a protected class? | ||
| And because you're saying whites are unprotected. | ||
| What is a protected class? | ||
|
unidentified
|
The protected class is from civil rights law. | |
| It's a term and it basically is a group that can have any number of characteristics. | ||
| It could be based on disability. | ||
| It could be based on sex. | ||
| It can be based on race, um, that you can't essentially discriminate against them for hiring or, or any number of other things on the basis of that. | ||
| Now, the irony of my book is that legally speaking, uh, whites are in fact a protected class because you can't discriminate against whites by race in theory. | ||
| In practice, that's just not the way civil rights law has worked at all. | ||
| And one of the really interesting things that's happened, I think the most effective group, or certainly one of them that has come out of the Trump administration, is America First Legal, Stephen Miller's shop. | ||
| And they have pursued a lot of legal cases coming out of the thing where there's just blatant anti-white discrimination. | ||
| It's not even hiding. | ||
| It's just out there. | ||
| It's illegal. | ||
| But until he came along, nobody was really saying, hey, we're going to prosecute you for this. | ||
| And what's happening is they're filing these legal cases, and in the vast majority of the times, it seems, the guys are just folding because they know they have no case. | ||
| They know that what they're doing is illegal. | ||
| But until very recently, we've never challenged them on that. | ||
| And so part of my book is saying, you know, we just need to be much more bold about challenging them on the things that they're doing that are blatantly illegal. | ||
| I want to get to some of your solutions in a second, and Stephen Miller is one of the smartest guys out there. | ||
| I want to play a clip from Red Ice TV. | ||
| Here at the War Room, we curate not just MSC and CNN, we also watch a lot of, you know, what I call ethno-nationalist Sharia supremacism, so we can understand that. | ||
| We have a lot of black nationalist sites, La Raza. | ||
| We also look at things like, Red Ice TV is over at Telegram, Hendrick, White culture doesn't exist. | ||
| That's as dumb as saying that white people don't exist. | ||
| As though we're just a hallucination. | ||
| but they have this channel that we also watch. | ||
| Let's play a clip of that and I'm going to come back to Jeremy. | ||
|
unidentified
|
White culture doesn't exist. | |
| That's as dumb as saying that white people don't exist, as though we're just a hallucination. | ||
| You will never hear such nonsense said about blacks, Asians, Jews, or literally any non-European group. | ||
| You don't even exist to me. | ||
| When someone says white people don't have a culture, they are trying to put you down, to make you feel less than or guilty, to enforce their own supremacy over you. | ||
| Then they will educate you on black culture. | ||
| Minorities, who make up the world's population, attack just about everything for being too white, or a white people thing, while telling us we don't have a culture. | ||
| Back it up. | ||
| Let's define white, because as we know, there's no denying what white is when it's time to single us out for white privilege or whiteness studies. | ||
| No! | ||
| Then we all know who a white person is, not a social construct, but a person of European descent. | ||
| In a shared European culture, a white culture exists. | ||
| When I watch some of these, what I call ethno-nationals, whether it's the Black, whether it's La Raza, and particularly the Red Ice TV and others like it, the one thing I say is, is it about white or is it about not having power? | ||
| Right? | ||
| And not having economic power. | ||
| It seems to me that the case they make a lot and others make is about, we're at each other's throat because of race. | ||
| But when we really think of it, most of the oppressors And according to your theory, of white people are whites. | ||
| The people that passed the law back in 1965, the vast majority of the administrative state, I would say 90% of the enemies of War Room, and myself personally, are not people of other races. | ||
| They're whites. | ||
| And when you look at like Red Eyes TV, when you look at the arguments they make, and you look at the arguments even some of these other ethno-nationalists, It's not really about race, it's about power. | ||
| And right now, it is whites in power who are neo-Marxist. | ||
| And who don't believe in the family or don't believe in the basics of the Judeo-Christian West, or to read ISIS TV, to the Christian West, or I guess in their case, even to the pagan West. | ||
| But it's not about race. | ||
| It's about power. | ||
| We're at war, quite frankly, with neo-Marxist whites who want to destroy the United States of America. | ||
| Looking at that in a wrong context, because I watch a lot of this stuff from different ones. | ||
| And I keep saying it's about economic power. | ||
| It's not about race. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I think there's two different things at play, Steve. | |
| And I think it's a very astute observation. | ||
| I mean, I think you have two different, a few different groups, right? | ||
| You have these elite leftist whites, and I actually talk quite a lot about them in the book. | ||
| And I think my follow on book to this is going to look at this group really Explicitly, because they're a very interesting group. | ||
| There's no other group that I'm aware of in the social science research where you find the following dynamic. | ||
| They have done kind of research where they kind of say, you know, how much do you prefer your own group versus other groups? | ||
| And they ask liberals, moderates, and conservatives of every race, You know, kind of how much in-group preference social scientists would say you have. | ||
| And unsurprisingly, pretty much everybody has some in-group preference. | ||
| This isn't abnormal that you would like people who are a little bit more like you in some way. | ||
| As long as it doesn't get out of control, you would expect this. | ||
| And unsurprisingly, you see this. | ||
| And you see it in every group, except for liberal whites. | ||
| And liberal whites have an out-group preference. | ||
| They actively dislike white people. | ||
| They think they're dumber and more criminal. | ||
| You kind of go down the line. | ||
| With the survey research. | ||
| So you have this really disturbed post-Christian, kind of post-rational view from some of these whites. | ||
| I think for others of them, Steve, and this is just something I think you were kind of touching on, it is about power, and at some level there's no bigger display of power than... But hang on, but hang on, but hang on. | ||
| This is the power of your book, and I'm glad to hear you're going to do a sequel. | ||
| Focus on this. | ||
| This gets my point to the Red Ice TV audience over at Telegram and others. | ||
| I want you to hit rewind, because I think you're to the heart of the problem. | ||
| The central part is progressive, I don't want to call them liberals, are neo-Marxist whites. | ||
| That hate, they've selected a group they hate. | ||
| They happen to hate whites. | ||
| And that's where they put the force. | ||
| Tell me about your research of that, because nobody wants to talk about this. | ||
| To me, this is the beating heart of the problem. | ||
| And this gets to this gets to a power dynamic that working class whites or even middle class or lower middle class whites are looked at as the enemy by other whites. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Absolutely. | |
| And there's no question that a lot of this is intra-white class dynamics. | ||
| And there's actually a doctoral thesis and I'm just blanking on the guy's name, but he finished it at Georgia State recently. | ||
| I believe he's now at the Manhattan Institute. | ||
| And he literally looked at this and I take a lot of the survey data from him. | ||
| Now he's not doing the primary survey data here, which would be a little more questionable. | ||
| He's taking like general social survey and very kind of unquestionable non-political data where they've Asked this so I think it's a concern and it's absolutely right to look at the class-based elements of this because I do think it's significant and I do think we have to talk about elites in a very big way and white elites and that's one of the reasons I want to talk about it. | ||
| At the same time, I don't want to totally whitewash the role of minority elites because I think a lot of this, which is also about wealth power transfer, I kind of argue at the end of my book, it's really about coming up with an ideology that can justify resource transfer away from people who might happen to be white who have resources to other groups, and so you have to have an ideology of white privilege, white supremacy, all these other things to justify that. | ||
| Look, this is amazing. | ||
| We've got to get you back to go in more detail because this book, but I want people to get the book. | ||
| Where do they go to get the book? | ||
| Where do they go to your website to find out more about you? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Absolutely, Steve. | |
| Thanks so much and really appreciate going on. | ||
| They can go get the book at local retailers. | ||
| You go on also on Amazon.com. | ||
| It's just been released this week. | ||
| If you want to find out more about me, I tweet pretty regularly at Real Jeremy Carl, and I have a substack, jeremycarl.substack.com, The Course of Empire. | ||
| It's new. | ||
| Would love folks to sign up for that as well. | ||
| The title is It's Okay to be White, but it's out in print as The Unprotected Class. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Jeremy, a fascinating book. | |
| That was my joke draft title. | ||
| It's The Unprotected Class, How Anti-White Racism is Tearing America Apart. | ||
| Go buy it. | ||
| It's great. | ||
| And I hope folks enjoy it. | ||
| And we're going to link to elements of the Tucker Carlson interview. | ||
| It was fantastic. | ||
| Tucker took a tremendous amount of time on this. | ||
| Jeremy, thank you very much, and I look forward to having you back on to go into more of the solutions. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thanks so much, Steve. | |
| I appreciate everything you do for the country. | ||
| Thanks, brother. | ||
| Lou Dobbs is next. | ||
| We're back at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. | ||
| I think we're also going to delve back into this book a little bit. | ||
| It's quite fascinating. | ||
| Something we strongly recommend people read. | ||
| Make sure you understand the issues. | ||
| Birchgold.com. | ||
| I'm a breakdown tomorrow. | ||
| Big elements of the end of the dollar empire. | ||
| That is part five. | ||
| Free installment. | ||
| Philip Patrick's not going to be able to join me because of travel, but I'll talk a little bit about capital markets and the underlying tensions that are driving the world's economy as only you can get it in the War Room. | ||
| Lou Dobbs up next. | ||
| War Room back live tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. | ||
| Eastern Daylight Time. |
Export Selection