All Episodes
June 19, 2024 - Bannon's War Room
47:49
WarRoom Battleground EP 558: 'On Call' The Lies Of Anthony Fauci
Participants
Main voices
n
natalie winters
27:07
s
steve bannon
14:42
Appearances
a
anthony fauci
01:05
r
rachel maddow
03:11
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
steve bannon
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.
rachel maddow
Sitting in front of the television, I knew we were going to have people who heard that from the president and would then go ahead and try it.
My phone immediately exploded with texts and calls asking me to comment.
I instantly realized that I and other scientists had to counter this message to keep Americans from ingesting bleach, which could literally kill them.
Dr. Anthony Fauci is in the bullseye of the Trump movement to this day.
As they seek to return to power.
He's in the bullseye of the Trump movement, even after leaving the government.
And it is not because of COVID.
And it is not because of the controversial and difficult decisions of this most recent epidemic threat that he helped the country face down.
He has faced down plenty of those in his 54 years at NIH.
What he's facing now is a political movement that cannot abide public health expertise at all.
Because it cannot abide expertise at all.
Because that competes with the truths that are spouted from the head of the leader.
It is a movement that cannot abide authority and expertise from anyone other than their leader.
And they answer any such competition for him with menace.
And it's not romantic, and it may be revolutionary, but there's nothing sexy or dramatic or lovely about it.
It is boring, it is violent, and it's about using force.
And it's a war against the U.S.
system of government.
Dr. Anthony Fauci is an accomplished and brave public servant.
He should not have to be as brave as he is.
steve bannon
Wednesday, 19 June, The Year of Our Lord 2024.
Natalie G. Winters, our executive editor, joins me.
Wow.
I saw that live, but seeing it again, I mean, Rachel's sad.
She's very sad, isn't she, Natalie?
I think we've broken her.
I think she's close to broken.
unidentified
The bullseye of a movement.
steve bannon
Your thoughts, ma'am?
Can you take this one, Natalie?
Because I've made Rachel cry, I've made Rachel sad, and she's sad.
natalie winters
Well, look, you're still living rent-free in her head in that interview.
You did get a shout-out, I think, for the infamous head-on-pike comment.
But no, these interviews are just truly preposterous.
I mean, that monologue goes on For minutes.
I think it's probably longer than she interviews him, which I think is sort of in and of itself an interesting tell.
In other words, not that they don't care about what Anthony Fauci has to say, but that they did such a heavy monologue leading into his show, and she even says, you know, I really am setting the stage right now.
Sort of a leading question, right?
It's an interesting way to back in to an interview, and I think it goes to what we were talking about in this morning's show, which is the important way to sort of contextualize what is the rollout of Anthony Fauci's book.
Like I said, he is so high on his own supply.
He is so narcissistic.
You can tell it from the way he just talks in the book.
That in his mind, he thinks this is a book tour that is all about him, America's most loyal and faithful and decent public servant that you can't criticize.
Apparently, that's the new rule in Joe Biden's America.
If you're a public servant, you can just never be criticized.
It's absolutely ridiculous.
But they spend most of the interview not really even getting into anything substantive.
Her questions are so leading.
And it's sort of a similar approach that I think we've seen With most interviews, the book, I believe it was first sort of previewed by an excerpt in the Atlantic, made its way to Rachel Maddow, Ari Melver, Stephen Colbert, right?
Sort of doing the whole gamut of book tours, but no one's really ever, at least in my opinion, asked him any questions that if he actually wanted to dispel the myths and rumors that he's talking about that are leading to these alleged death threats that he and his family are receiving, he's not really doing But hang on, hang on, hang on.
steve bannon
I want to get to that.
But you said something, you gave us the buried lead.
And I'll be honest, I missed that, too, until you said it.
It felt kind of stupid.
unidentified
Thank you.
This is a big day.
steve bannon
No, no, no.
When you're on the morning show, because I guess I guess I'm so into the narrative of Fauci and what happened during the pandemic.
Right.
And about the credential class and about their attitude to the American people and how they can put things out.
And they're just holy writ, and it's not to be questioned, that I actually missed the most important thing.
And I kind of felt like a fool afterwards.
You said, and I want to go back, this is introduction.
The timing of this book and Fauci is all about the 2024 election.
It's all, this is another, this is Trump.
Because they started with the bleach.
This is about Trump.
That's the segment she's reading.
And that's how Rachel Maddow, who is the railhead, when you launch a book, you know, you pick your, you know, am I going to get on Hannity, or I'm going to get on Jesse Waters, or I'm going to go on War Room, or I'm going to do Charlie Kirk or Alex Jones.
You know, your comms team kind of picks, you know, who do you have the best relationship with, whose audience is into your stuff already.
You want to start with the big bang.
Am I going to go on Tucker?
Rachel Maddow is the is the railhead of the entire progressive left.
She's the get.
And that's how she starts a book with the thing.
And when you said it this morning, of course, I go, of course, this is what it is.
I'm too tied in looking at the pandemic and what went wrong and Fauci and his crimes and all that.
But they're using Fauci, Fauci's story and Fauci as an instrument To go after Trump for just the evil one, right?
So let's take it in that perspective, what you know.
So we're going to get into the rest of it.
Let's go into the, and I hope to do it all in this hour, although there's so much breaking news out of England on Nigel Farage, because this thing's taken on a life of its own.
A lot of it's dealing with our audience in the United Kingdom, of course, in the United States, that Ben is going to join me from Rome.
But give the audience, particularly folks that may not have heard the morning piece.
You nailed this.
This whole book, the way he's being introduced, the topics and the way that they present it to him.
This is all about another augmenting force coming in as an instrumentality to take out Trump in 2024, ma'am.
natalie winters
Well, thank you.
I'm very giddy that I found a buried lead that you didn't.
unidentified
That makes me happy, too, to no end.
natalie winters
But, you know, I think we always talk about, on this show, when it comes to the mainstream media, there's sort of a wash, rinse, repeat cycle, but it's timing that is so important, right?
Anthony Fauci could have put this book out whenever.
Right.
He hasn't really been doing anything.
He's been, you know, hold up at Georgetown, not really teaching any classes and just probably getting nice royalty payments from pharma companies.
So there's a reason that they're doing it now.
And if you look at even just the written coverage coming from the mainstream media on his book,
the leads that they're going with, even though, like I said, in listening to the book, the
majority of it has to do with Anthony Fauci's life story.
I'm talking down to the coordinates of where he grew up and his sister and his mom's death.
You know, it's very interpersonal.
It's very much about his life.
So it's sort of, I think there's a disconnect between the way the press is treating the
book because that's the book that they wanted, right, versus the actual book itself.
It's not like they're having Anthony Fauci on to talk about his childhood, to inspire
the, as Anthony Fauci always says, you know, next generation of public servants.
It's interesting that they are really myopically focused on basically get Trump.
And some of the headlines, USA Today is running with Anthony Fauci on the fight to combat COVID and contradicting Trump.
Axios ran with explicit rants and love.
Fauci recounts toxic relationship with Trump in new book.
All of the articles that talk about, oh, the top takeaways from Anthony Fauci's book, it's all Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump.
But the funniest part of all of it is that there really is no smoking gun.
A lot of the articles, too, there's literally a CNN article, the headline is, Donald Trump dropped an F-bomb on phone call with Fauci.
You know, Donald Trump referred to Biden as an effing loser on phone call with Fauci, right?
It's not like there's really any substantive claims.
So that's why you're, of course, getting these very, you know, flowery interviews, these dramatic monologues from Rachel Maddow.
They're, of course, overplaying, you know, the bleach comments.
But it's sort of the old playbook that we've seen with Anthony Fauci, really, since time immemorial.
But I think it goes to something bigger.
And I think you see this when you start To look at the interviews also through the other, I would say, connected lens, which is Anthony Fauci talking about misinformation.
And if you take a step back, I think one of the side effects of going after people like Peter Daszak, the hearings that we've had on those people, is that the American people are very skeptical now of the, like I always say, the largest grift in human history, which is pandemic.
Prevention, right?
And Peter Daszak and Anthony Fauci are tight.
Anthony Fauci has spoken at EcoHealth Alliance events, right?
They know each other.
They can deny it all they want, but there's pictures of them together.
We know Peter Daszak was coordinating with Anthony Fauci's top advisor, which Anthony Fauci says is just a figurehead role, but in just the days leading up to his testimony, So there is, I think, a consensus among the Peter Doshaks, the Fauci's, the Peter Hotezes of the world, you know, all the people that you saw telling you to get vaccinated and if you didn't, it was because you were an immoral, unethical person on, you know, CNN, MSNBC, you name it.
But I think those people really realize, they see the writing on the wall, that the pandemic prevention grift is kind of over.
So I think that's why it is so imperative for them to discount not just podcasts like The War Room, but people like President Trump and people who kind of, I think, adjudicated COVID-19 on a fair basis, not beholden to big pharma interests, to corporate interests, or even just to the sort of scientist mindset That disregards the fact that funding research with the Chinese Communist Party is a bad idea because the means to an end, right, the end is just funding scientific research.
That's all they care about.
Everything else goes by the wayside.
So that's why I think you see Anthony Fauci also extrapolate even going bigger than Trump.
Being rolled out right now, you know, the WHO pandemic treaty just failed.
So I think it's very important That they use Anthony Fauci as a weapon to sort of go after what they would decry as, you know, the anti-science, the anti-vaccine movement.
And that's why you see, again, in coordination with a lot of the anti-Trump stuff, the, uh, giving Anthony Fauci, you know, a chance to explain himself on the efficacy of vaccines.
And again, it goes back to, to what you're saying, Steven, I think this has sort of been The age-old question with Anthony Fauci and with all these people who have pushed sort of more mainstream narratives on COVID, if they really are so scared of the death threats they're receiving and if they really want to reason with the American people who think that they're these evil conspiracy theory type monsters,
Then why are you doing your book tour on Rachel Maddow?
Why are you going on Stephen Colbert?
Why are you going on Ari Melber?
Anthony Fauci, I'm sure, open invitation.
He should want to come on War Room and do an hour long sit down with you and go through all the claims.
But instead, they're choosing to run on these softball interviews while simultaneously playing the game of obviously censoring shows like this.
And I think if you even take one step kind of back and look at it from a more meta perspective, Right.
For so long, they've just basically censored criticism, right?
They've censored War Room.
It shouldn't be lost on anyone that it was because of what you said metaphorically about Fauci that we were banned on what was it?
YouTube and Spotify.
And now they're bringing Anthony Fauci back to, I think, They realize those old tactics, the Russian disinformation criticisms don't really work anymore.
So they're bringing him back.
I'm sure he probably wanted to go into retirement, but they can't.
He has to defend his legacy.
So I think there's a lot of factors at play here.
I think it's easy to discount anything Anthony Fauci does as being motivated by just his own ego and delusions of grandeur. But I think he
is being used by the mainstream media.
I'm sure he's complicit in it. Of course, his wife is busy donating to Joe Biden and was doing that
throughout his response to COVID. Anthony Fauci's daughter is working, similar to Lauren Mershawn,
it's a funny connection, actually, at a left-wing digital fundraising advertising group that was
working not just with organizations that were promoting COVID-19 campaigns, but with Democrat
politicians. So there's some interesting family connections there. But it's, it's, it's,
It's something much bigger than Anthony Fauci, and I wouldn't be surprised if we continually see him throughout this election cycle as sort of the torchbearer of anti-science.
steve bannon
Unless we crush it now, which I think we could crush it.
First off, you can tell in his demeanor.
This is not the smug Fauci of yesteryear.
He's nervous.
He's sad.
He's very sad.
He's sad like Rachel said.
In fact, they were sad together.
We had sad together.
natalie winters
He's got the long face.
You can see it on the book cover.
steve bannon
He's got the long face.
It always helps me when I try to break things down to see pattern recognitions and break things down in categories and to think about what they're trying to do.
And particularly since you enlightened me about this is all about, you know, 2024.
It seems to me in three big categories, because he goes out of his way and you know that they give these guys They tell him, hey, here's the questions we want to be answered.
Here's the areas, maybe not specific questions, but the areas.
One is the origins of COVID.
OK, that is a big category.
He wants to get his story out on the origins.
Number two is response and particularly initial response, because that should have been his highest.
Level of expertise, since he was the known, you know, pandemic specialist, so initial response.
And the third is treatments before they even considered vaccines to be even a possibility.
What were the treatments?
And in those categories, in Origins, you have the Wuhan lab and his continual defense of the natural, you know, the bat cave. On the initial
response, you have the Dr. Peter Navarro in the Situation Room story and his initial conversations
with people like Mark Short and Vice President Pence, Judas Pence. And the third is where
we have hydroxychloroquine, where he's gone out of his way and they've picked it up in
USA Today and others.
Do we have the clips from any of that?
If you tell me when you get those clips ready.
I want to just ask you in those general categories, he obviously understands for his legacy, he's got to deal with these three broad categories.
He's got to deal with the origins.
And particularly, and to sit there and Ari Melber, and Ari Melber as nicely as possible is trying to say, well, you know, the Wall Street Journal said this, the New York Times, and he's like freaked out.
The New York Times has an editorial that which the woman, the female doctor says anybody believes that didn't come from the Wuhan lab is just incompetent.
The other is the is Peter Navarro.
He goes out of his way on the initial response.
To denigrate and to lie, a bald-faced lie.
We know it's a lie because it's in Navarro's books about that initial response and that initial meeting.
And then, obviously, hydroxychloroquine in the array of treatments, potential treatments, is something that still he understands that's something he's got to deal with.
First off, is that a good way to break down at least some of the messaging he's trying to do about what happened versus the myth that they want to spin about what they want the American people to remember what happened, ma'am?
natalie winters
Yeah, I think that's the perfect way to sort of bifurcate the time periods in terms of Anthony Fauci's book and just how he's always He's handled this from a media perspective, but I think he sort of plays, you know, footsie, right?
He's always moving the goalpost on each of those time periods.
I think the one where it's probably most pronounced is when it comes to the origins of COVID.
And a lot of what he says, I mean, just, it doesn't really mesh, right?
It can't really coexist with itself.
Because if you watch his old testimony, whether it's with Senator Rand Paul or other members of Congress, The first round, he's like, the Wuhan Institute of Virology?
I've never heard of that.
We never gave them money.
Then the second time, he's grilled by Senator Paul.
It's, well, we did give them money, but we didn't fund gain-of-function research.
Then the NIH comes out and says, well, actually, Anthony Fauci, you're wrong.
It was gain-of-function research, and as we know from FOIA emails and internal documents, And even the grant itself, it was indeed gain-of-function research.
So then you come to the most recent congressional hearing where Anthony Fauci says, well, maybe it was gain-of-function research, but we're going to change the definition of what gain-of-function research is, delete it from the NIH website, so therefore it's not gain-of-function research.
So it's a lot of word games and just obfuscating the truth, but even I think the most bold lie that he told last night is saying that You know, we never sent money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, right?
Who knows?
Maybe COVID came from another Chinese lab.
It didn't come from the one that I funded.
I mean, he's just pulling things out of a hat at that point.
That's such a preposterous claim.
And just to lay down the law when it comes to anti-Fauci, the grant that we're talking about, it was called Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.
It ran from, I believe, 2014 to 2021, there were about 30 studies that were funded under that nearly $4 million grant, and over half of them, 16, counted scientists and authors from the Chinese Communist Party, that if you read the papers, and I did this, I was on your show probably three, four years ago, I remember doing this exact segment, where if you go through it and you look in the acknowledgement section where they say who funded it,
It says the money that came from NIAID, from NIH, it wasn't just that it was being allocated to the American scientists.
You go through it through a very analytical, linguistic lens, it says it was going to the Chinese scientists too.
Full stop.
You can't argue with that.
The actual documents are there.
If you want to talk about something that Congress should have actually pressed him on when they were questioning him not too long ago, I think those documents should have been something that they presented.
But he just continues to move the goalposts, particularly on the origins.
And remember, had it not been for shows like this, For really investigative reporters, we wouldn't really even know that there was any semblance of a connection between Anthony Fauci and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, right?
He's only ever had to utter the words, Wuhan, because of the crazy, deranged conspiracy theorists that they've been trying to silence.
So that's the only reason that that's even in the lexicon, right, of COVID origins debate.
It's not like he was ever forthright with any of his ties, which you would think is something that someone who, like I said, has spent hours on this book talking about His ethics, his morals, how much of an upstanding public servant he is that, you know, honesty would be something that would be imperative.
But then when you get to the vaccines, to the masks, to the lockdowns, again, that's another thing where you see him not only manipulating the science, right?
We know it was just recently it came out.
He couldn't readily point to a study that proved the efficacy of masks or social distancing, especially among children.
But I also think you see him playing an interesting game In that phase of the pandemic, where in the moment, right, he was the man of the hour, he couldn't find a TV camera or an award or a grant that he couldn't accept, right?
He was so eager to be in front of the American people, to be the figurehead, to be the poster child of America's COVID-19 response.
But then he backtracks in all of his interviews, In the book, during his congressional hearing, and says, well, actually, I didn't have any power.
It was the FDA.
It was the CDC.
It was other people.
I didn't really know.
So then he was effectively LARPing as Mr. COVID, right?
He wasn't actually, if he didn't actually have any control, then why was he going on the news, speaking so authoritatively, saying, I am the science, right?
You can't both be the science, but then also be overruled by everyone at the CDC.
And then when you come to sort of the fallout post-COVID, I think this dovetails with what we were talking about before.
In terms of how they're very frightened and they want to smear people who don't buy into this BS notion that is pandemic prevention, which, make no mistake, pandemic prevention is empowering the same people who are supposed to stop pandemics to also get the same funding and resources to be able to create the so-called remedies and therapies, i.e.
vaccines, that they will make billions, if not trillions, of dollars from if they fail at their job.
In preventing the next pandemic.
I also think it's worth making a note that it's very curious to me that if Anthony Fauci really, like, if his press team, his PR team really wanted him, or it's not even a press or PR thing, if he genuinely cared, right, about convincing the American people that he were even handed in this, if that were even just a speck in his mind, He hasn't said or made any comments on Peter Daszak, right?
And the misdeeds that were carried out by him.
Because he can't, because he would admit that he was funding the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
But the narrative that he is pushing is just very crafted.
It is buttress by moving the goalposts every which way, every interview that he does.
And it's very rare that he comes across people Who really even pushed back on him.
I mean, Ari Melbourne, Melbourne, I don't even really know if you can call that a pushback.
I mean, I guess he technically cited, you know, some people who maybe marginally disagreed with Anthony Fauci, but that's why he's doing these softball interviews.
That that's because he, he, he would crumble under the pressure because I don't think there's, there's much further left to move the goalposts.
steve bannon
I'm making a call here, but I can't, as much as I gotta have Nigel tonight, I gotta, we can let Ben Harnwell go to bed.
I'll have to do Ben tomorrow.
I gotta get, this is much too fascinating.
Do I have time to play a clip before I go to break?
Do I have any of the clips that are under two minutes or around two minutes?
Just give me a heads up.
unidentified
I tell you what, let me, let's go ahead and play clip two.
rachel maddow
It means that instead of the virus being able to hop from person to person to person to person, spreading and spreading, sickening some of them but not all of them, and the ones that it doesn't sicken don't know they have it and then they give it to even more people because they didn't recognize.
Instead of the virus being able to hop from person to person to person, Potentially mutating and becoming more virulent and drug-resistant along the way.
Now we know that the vaccines work well enough that the virus stops with every vaccinated person.
A vaccinated person gets exposed to the virus.
The virus does not infect them.
The virus cannot then use that person to go anywhere else.
It cannot use a vaccinated person as a host to go get more people.
steve bannon
That means the vaccines will get us to the end of this.
Now, a programming note, Harnwell's going to be, there's massive news coming out of the UK on Nigel Farage and this entire election that's going to take place on July 4th and people are talking about Nigel maybe as the next Prime Minister.
We're going to have, we'll have Ben on tomorrow because this Fauci thing is too important.
Birch Gold, you think it's turbulent?
We talked to you today at 5 about this massive deficit and how it's going to only get crazier.
The Japanese bank that's now Blowing out $63 billion, I think it is, of government securities because they're underwater.
Don't you become underwater?
Gold has been a hedge for 5,000 years of man's recorded history.
A hedge against times of financial turbulence.
Go check it out with Philip Patrick and the team today.
Birchgold.com slash Bannon.
Talk to Philip Patrick about gold as a hedge against financial turbulence, shortly.
unidentified
War Room Battleground with Stephen K. Bannon.
steve bannon
Welcome back.
One of the things we do as sponsors is make sure you get access to the top people.
Go to birchgold.com and connect with Philip Patrick and his team of analysts.
They will walk you through the microeconomics of this much better than we can.
It's not our area of expertise, but go talk to them.
You get the macro and you get the capital markets, you get the political economy, I guess you would call it in the old days.
But they're there and you really got to understand precious metals.
It's just part of the financial system.
Particularly as one tries to build towards retirement.
Birchgold.com slash Bannon.
Talk to Philip Patrick and his team over there.
Also, you know, I got to have Tej go.
I think I want to set up with Mo and Grace to have Tej Gill do a live stream.
I think that's what we'll do over at Warpath Coffee, the Navy SEAL.
That said, hey, we got the best equipment in the world as a Navy SEAL.
Why am I drinking Swill as far as the coffee goes?
And he's dedicated his life to great coffee.
That's why he's a great partner of the Warpath Coffee.
Go to warpath.coffee slash warroom.
You get your 15% discount, but get on the Warpath today.
That coffee is unbelievable.
As Natalie knows, we're coffee aficionados.
Might even say junkies.
And my last bad habit.
I don't know if it's a bad habit.
I think every other year they get a report out that it helps your heart and helps you go.
So, Warpath coffee.
Here's what I want to do.
I want to make sure that we're because this is it's Fauci's very slippery.
What we just played was from 2021.
So I want to play that again and I want to stop and then I want to show you what they just said.
On Fauci's book tour.
So if Denver and my crack production team, let's play what we just heard through the break.
Natalie, I've come to the conclusion this may take us more than one show.
And we have to do this.
This is central to going forward because one of the things they're panic about and Rachel said and Fauci said is we're going to deconstruct the administrative state and we're going to rejuvenate, purge, then rejuvenate these institutions.
This is a massive amount of work.
Uh, in the second Trump term.
And so we have to, we have to go through this methodically.
And so we're going to carve out more time and other shows during the week.
But let's just play what we just, what we just saw.
This is from 2021.
Let's play that and then we'll stop and we'll play what they're saying last night.
rachel maddow
It means that instead of the virus being able to hop from person to person to person to person, spreading and spreading, sickening some of them but not all of them, and the ones that it doesn't sicken don't know they have it and then they give it to even more people because they didn't recognize.
Instead of the virus being able to hop from person to person to person, Potentially mutating and becoming more virulent and drug-resistant along the way.
Now we know that the vaccines work well enough that the virus stops with every vaccinated person.
A vaccinated person gets exposed to the virus.
The virus does not infect them.
The virus cannot then use that person to go anywhere else.
It cannot use a vaccinated person as a host to go get more people.
That means the vaccines will get us to the end of this.
steve bannon
Wow.
How dangerous is she?
Natalie, thoughts before we play what they're saying now.
That is just, I don't know why there's not, Naomi Wolf's got to get on this.
Why is there not a class action suit against Rachel Maddow and her team and MSNBC for just lying to your face, ma'am?
natalie winters
There should be, and it's not just the COVID vaccines that they're lying about.
I think they were waging the same level of information warfare, right, which let's call it what it is, really on all aspects of COVID.
I think The vaccines are just the easiest ones to be able to discern it about because you're dealing with, you know, more objective scientific data.
I mean, I have to say, when you take a step back, you know, my background in all of this is the Chinese Communist Party.
And when you look at the three warfare doctrine, right, you're working with, Lawfare, media manipulation, psychological warfare.
You know, you really see all the hallmarks of those campaigns going on, being waged by the mainstream media, right?
The psychological control, the fear, media warfare, obviously the lawfare, mandating vaccines, lawsuits, if you didn't get vaccinated.
But it just goes back to, I think, this, you know, the phrase safe And effective, right?
There was this general locus where all of these COVID narratives were coming from, right?
The sort of The way they were handling, rolling out these vaccines, it was like some, you know, cushy Madison Avenue PR firm was behind it.
Safe and effective, right?
That was the, you know, focus group tested phrasing that they thought the American people would buy into.
And I think the question of sort of now, the COVID response, which is what I wish the COVID Select Committee was diving into, is, you know, who comprised that key group of people That was making those decisions, right?
When we say, oh, they were mandating this, they were doing that, you know, who constitutes that they?
And when you take a step back, and frankly, what you said to sort of pregame that clip, why this matters is because they're obviously, if you want to link it to the whole Trump thing, They're in meltdown, right, about the Agenda 47, deconstructing the administrative state, right, the concept that just because you're a faceless bureaucrat, it doesn't mean that you're holier than thou.
You can still be held accountable for your actions.
I mean, Anthony Fauci is sort of the figurehead for that movement.
You could almost say that in Trump's first term, in that struggle between Trump and the administrative state.
I don't think there's a single better person who reifies, who represents to their core the deep state, the medical, pharmaceutical, industrial complex, right?
That is Anthony Fauci.
unidentified
So that's why they're defending him tooth and nail.
natalie winters
They were doing it at the time, right?
And covering for these vaccines, calling them safe and effective.
Now the narrative, the phrasing has changed a little bit.
But they will fight tooth and nail to defend his legacy, because they are so scared, right, of the deconstructing, burning down the administrative state, that this is sort of, I think, the opening salvo in that war, that they are very scared that the Trump campaign, the sort of MAGA movement, is going to emerge victorious.
But I think the best way to sort of win our case and debunk the words of Anthony Fauci most recently
are just by playing his old clips, right?
Because they're in direct contradiction with what he's saying now.
steve bannon
Exactly.
No, bald face.
So let's go ahead and play.
Let's play the, let's play safe and effective.
Let's play this and then, um, um, Natalie, I want your observations on it.
Let's go ahead and play what's played and what's gone on in the last two days.
anthony fauci
I think if you fast forward now about denying the science of a vaccine and denying that vaccines are safe and effective when you have billions of people who've been vaccinated and the data showing the life-saving elements of a vaccine, that is tantamount to denialism.
Yeah.
And when people don't get vaccinated, Because of whatever ideological reason they have for not getting vaccinated, those are lives lost that are avoidable deaths.
And there's been some modeling studies to show that there have been a substantial number of people that would have been alive had they gotten vaccinated that didn't get vaccinated merely because ideologically they didn't think you should get vaccinated.
They believed people who said vaccines don't work and vaccines are dangerous.
And many of those people are dead now, and that's really unfortunate.
No matter what their political slant is, that pains me to see people having died because of a decision based on a political reason.
steve bannon
That's just a bald-faced lie.
People didn't get that.
It had nothing to do with politics.
It had to do with people understanding the science.
And what Rachel Maddow just said before is an absolute bald-faced lie.
And now they came out, oh, it wasn't meant to do that.
The people at the war room are not vaccinated.
We're not vaccinated because we got down and looked at the information and they said they took an option out.
And I had a lot of family members, not a lot, I had some family members that not only were vaxxed, but they were adamant that you had to get vaxxed.
And I think we've seen over the vaccine injuries.
I mean, I'd like to know, I'd like him to cite those modeling studies.
Natalie, your thoughts and observations on this.
natalie winters
Look, Steve, I don't usually get worked up on The War Room, but that clip is so infuriating.
And I feel like I also have to take a step back here.
My father has been on War Room.
He's an infectious disease doctor.
He played a very critical role in a lot of COVID stuff out here in Los Angeles.
And, you know, what Anthony Fauci is saying there It's just, it's so beyond the pale.
When, from what I heard from my father's experience with these COVID vaccines, people's hesitancy with wanting to take them, the level of the mandates.
I mean, you remember I was at the University of Chicago.
I was in college when all of this was happening.
And I literally would not have been able to have gotten my degree, which frankly, that would have been okay by me.
But that aside, had I not, you know, I obviously didn't get vaccinated, but I have a, you know, whatever.
Anyways, but the coercion, the manipulation that they perpetuated on the American people should not be lost on anyone.
Like I said, it goes back to that three warfare's doctrine.
It's Chinese Communist Party style warfare, biological warfare too, that they perpetrated against the American people.
But, you know, to bring it back to Anthony Fauci, It just doesn't square, right, with what he's saying because throughout COVID-19, he depicted himself.
He said he was the science.
He was Mr. Science.
He literally was on TV every night pumping these vaccines, right?
And then he goes and says, oh, well, it wasn't really me.
It was the CDC that ruled this.
It was the FDA that ruled this.
I don't have any stake in big pharma.
So there's just a lack of congruity, right, in terms of the messaging from there.
And one of the other stories that they had played, I believe it was in the MSNBC interview with Rachel Maddow, like the excerpts from the book, it had to do With him and he says, me, my wife and our COVID pod, which I mean, whatever that means, it was his neighbors that I guess they had all agreed that they were going to like self isolate or something, who knows what they were doing.
But he's like, we were sitting outside by the fireplace and my phone calls and it's Albert Bourla talking about the COVID vaccines.
And he says that Albert says to him on the phone, I should add veterinarian Albert Borla says to him on the phone, we've got the data back, you know, upwards of 90%.
We're going to stop this thing.
It's crazy.
It's crazy.
We're so lucky.
unidentified
And it's, it's beyond the pale.
natalie winters
It's just not scientifically proven because all those studies, right?
The work of Dr. Wolf that we've shown, It was never real.
They were hiding the data.
They were fudging the numbers of people who were either dying from the vaccine or if it wasn't working.
And I think, too, when you take a step back and you look at it even further, If you keep score of all the things that they have been wrong on and all the things that we have been wrong on, it is like a thousand, frankly, to zero, right?
We haven't been wrong on anything because believe me, if we were, we would know about it.
It would be leading.
Every mainstream media news program I'm sure would be sued for defamation, right?
You name it.
They get it wrong all the time and they cite, well, it was the fog of war.
We were in the midst of a pandemic.
What are we supposed to do?
Right?
Oh no.
They cite that as the rationale for why they weren't wrong.
And again, it goes back to the age-old question of intentionality versus incompetence.
I don't think this is a result of incompetence.
I think it's a result of intentionality.
The vaccine issue in particular is, I think, the one that they're probably the weakest on, though there are, you know, similarly weak issues, especially on the origins of it.
But they've just continued to move the goalposts.
And look, it shouldn't be lost on anyone.
Remember how they had wanted to release, I believe it was either through Freedom of Information Act requests or just sort of the general records requests when it comes to vaccine trials and patents and stuff of that ilk.
They're going to release that several decades from now.
So you can't concurrently say, the American people don't believe us, they're crazy conspiracy theorists, but oh, we're also not going to show them the evidence and purposely hide it for decades, right?
There's no effort for them trying to actually court American people to take COVID vaccines, right?
And you would think that that's something that they would want to do, and two points on that.
One, they don't do it because they know they don't have to, because even if they lie and say these vaccines are safe and effective for years, Anthony Fauci can come back and write his stupid book on call, and they're not going to really press him on it, right?
They're going to let him just run cover and say, oh, it worked!
We saved millions of lives!
Like, where did you get that number?
But the other, I think, even more interesting thing is that i know i remember the story from what was it a few years ago where it was shown that hhs the federal government was paying news outlets to pump the covid vaccine but they were also paying coming from various federal agencies
Very weird, predominantly left-wing, you know, NGOs, activist-type groups to specifically court minorities, especially black people.
I mean, if you really go through the groups, it's very niche entities, like going after Hispanic women who are single moms.
It's like they were waging these campaigns.
On micro-targeted groups of how to get them to take the vaccine, support it, and be about it.
And I just think that that's sort of an interesting juxtaposition, right?
Where you see there is some level of information warfare being waged from a systemic government-backed level on certain groups, but then they're not willing to sort of play that same game on TV IE, my takeaway from it, frankly, it bears all the hallmarks of what they've done on the Ukraine war, right, is that they're just lying.
So then once they actually get the funding, the subsidies, then the narrative shifts, and not to go too tangential, but it was so funny, the last Ukraine aid package that Biden was really whipping for, right, the whole narrative that we heard from every single leader, Biden most pronouncedly, was If Ukraine doesn't get these arms, they're going to lose.
The world's going to crumble.
Democracy's going to die.
You know what's so interesting?
The day after they got that aid package, an internal memo from Blinken's trip over to Ukraine—it was leaked, it wasn't public—showed that Antony Blinken was saying, oh, Ukraine's going to win the war.
We were going to win the war, no matter what, we're going to win.
So my point is, they lie for whatever is convenient at the time.
And yeah, maybe the Ukraine lies don't affect America as directly except for our tax dollars and our pocketbooks, right?
But when you're dealing with vaccines and injecting yourself with experimental mRNA technology, That's a whole different ballgame than when you're using those psychological warfare tactics.
There are real ramifications that, you know, Anthony Fauci, or rather, Dr. Naomi Wolf, has been telling us for years.
steve bannon
I've made a command decision.
This is so good, and we've got so much more to break down.
I'm sure we're having more tonight.
We're going to do, I think, both Thursday and Friday.
I'll figure it out.
This is just too good, and I don't want to do any more tonight because I want to take plenty of time.
I've got Wuhan lab.
We're going to get to Dr. Navarro.
So, Natalie, social media, we'll do this again tomorrow when we even have more.
We've got two-thirds of the ones we didn't even get a chance to play tonight.
Where do people go for you on social media and to find out all the information you're putting out?
natalie winters
Well, I'm still blocked by Peter Daszak, which means you should definitely follow me.
You can go to Natalie G. Winters on all social media platforms.
And Steve, I think we should try to book Anthony Fauci for a War Room interview.
We, I think, probably moved the most books out of any show, so I would think he'd want to come on.
unidentified
I think his publisher, but it won't be me, it'll be you.
steve bannon
You would do the interview.
unidentified
Happily.
steve bannon
You're by far... Can he handle... What are you... Are you 22 now?
unidentified
23?
steve bannon
How old are you? 21?
natalie winters
Thank you, I'm 23.
unidentified
23.
But I've been doing this since I was 19.
steve bannon
I remember you just as a 19, just a teenager.
I feel old now, I know.
Can you handle a 23-year-old who was hammering him at the age of 20 for his lies?
Natalie, thank you so much.
Honored to have you on here.
We'll see you tomorrow.
We'll do this again.
I didn't even get to the bald-faced lie about Dr. Peter Navarro, but we will do this as we break this all down, and I think we'll have these things set up, and I want to roll through them maybe tomorrow, and boom.
You'll see what his fear is on the origin stories, the initial response of what his recommendations were in the therapies.
Recommendations in therapies, very important.
Like I said, Birchgold.
We give you access to Philip Patrick.
Use it.
Go over to Birchgold right now.
Also, two other things we give you access to is Jace Medical, Dr. Sean and the team.
It started with the Chinese Communist Party here on pandemic, speaking of pandemic, back in January about the supply chains.
Couldn't get your medicines because of supply chains.
That's changed dramatically.
Not that the CCP still controls all of it.
Nothing's changed there.
But with cyber attacks, artificial intelligence, cyber, but bankruptcies, and people just saying, hey, I can't get my medicines anymore.
There's a solution for that.
That's what Jace Medical is all about.
Go to jacemedical.com and talk to Dr. Sean Rowland and his amazing team.
Same with Silent.
The government, you know this, particularly what they don't have to even come and bring a warrant for to listen to and watch what you're doing and going to your emails and going to your text messages, slnt.com slash ban and get a discount.
Get all the Faraday bags.
These are state of the art Faraday bags.
Make sure the government or, you know, foreign actors, non-government agencies are just bad guys.
Keep it in a Faraday bag.
Over at Silent.
Silent.com.
And my favorite, Orca.
The apex predator.
When he took down a great white, all he ate, all it ate was the liver.
We give it to you.
Hey, that shark's liver wasn't grass-fed.
We give you grass-fed beef liver.
SacredHumanHealth.com.
Go check out what your compadres in the worm are saying about this amazing product.
Lou Dobbs, the great Lou Dobbs is next.
We are back in the worm at 10 a.m.
Eastern Daylight Time tomorrow morning.
Export Selection