July 12, 2024 - Bannon's War Room
47:56
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is what you're fighting for. | ||
|
unidentified
|
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. | ||
|
unidentified
|
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. | ||
| Good afternoon. | ||
| Hanwell here at the helm, Thursday 11th of July, Anno Domini 2024, sitting in for Steve Bannon, who is currently in one of Joe Biden's federal prisons, keeping him from adding his unique insights to the Donald Trump campaign. | ||
| We're going to start today with E.J. | ||
| Antoni, because the Biden regime is presently winning a victory lap over the latest Consumer Price Index figures. | ||
| June 2023 to 2024 are down to 3.0%. | ||
| E.J., good afternoon to you. | ||
| Good afternoon. | ||
| Thank you for having me. | ||
| Good statistics for the Biden regime, but they're not being felt by most Americans. | ||
| Is that right? | ||
| Right. | ||
| Unfortunately, the problems that we have had going on in the Consumer Price Index, the CPI, for quite some time now, they continue to rear their ugly head. | ||
| And I can give just a couple of very good examples of that, one of which is health insurance. | ||
| According To the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the cost of health insurance has actually dropped by over 4% over the last year. | ||
| Now, anyone who has bought health insurance knows that that is absolute nonsense. | ||
| Costs are going up, not down, but that's helping to drag down the index. | ||
| And then you can also look at the cost to own a home today. | ||
| The monthly mortgage payment on a median price home, so we're not talking a mansion here, just a median price home, that is up about 117% since Biden took office, so June of 2024 compared to January of 2021. | ||
| took office. So June of 2024 compared to January of 2021. | ||
| Now, if you look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, what they use is just rents and they try to | ||
| figure out from that the cost of home ownership. And somehow that cost is only up about 22 | ||
| percent over that same time period. | ||
| In other words, they're off by about a factor of 4 or 5 here. | ||
| I mean, this is just absolute nonsense. | ||
| And so because they're not actually measuring the true cost of living increase, they are grossly undercounting inflation. | ||
| And the numbers that we're getting today, I think, are evidence of that. | ||
| So while the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the BLS, tries to tell you that prices are only up 3% over the last year and that prices actually fell slightly from May of this year to June of this year, the average American knows better. | ||
| They can see when they look at their monthly bills, for example, that their costs are exploding. | ||
| Food is more expensive than it has ever been before. | ||
| Rent is higher today than it ever has been before. | ||
| Your electric bill, your gas bill, you name it. | ||
| The list goes on and on. | ||
| This is why people feel poorer today. | ||
| It's because they demonstrably are. | ||
| So basically it's the BLS pushing out BS. | ||
| How do you think ordinary working Americans are going to feel? | ||
| Are they going to feel gaslighted to some extent, you think, when these official statistics are coming out telling them that times have never been greater, as it were, when really they're struggling, folks are struggling to make it to the end of the month, people are cutting back? | ||
| How are people actually going to handle the anger at these messages, do you think? | ||
| Will it make the Biden administration seem even more out of touch from the concerns of ordinary Americans? | ||
| Well, as they said in the Clinton years, it's the economy, stupid. | ||
| And a lot of people, I think, are feeling that today in terms of their voting preferences. | ||
| Increasingly, in political polling data, as we go through those numbers, we find people more and more saying that they have had enough of Bidenomics. | ||
| Well, regardless of how they think about social issues, even regardless of how they think about things like the border, whatever the case may be, they increasingly are saying, my paycheck doesn't go as far as it used to, I can't make ends meet anymore, I have had to pick up multiple jobs, I'm drowning in credit card debt, etc. | ||
| That has become the number one priority for a lot of Americans today, whether they're on the political left or the political right. | ||
| It doesn't matter. | ||
| It doesn't matter if they're registered as a Republican or a Democrat. | ||
| It is the economy, stupid. | ||
| And so that, I think, is really going to motivate a lot of people this November. | ||
| And again, the polling data really bears that out. | ||
| And people, going back to your gaslighting point, people are sick and tired of being told, don't believe your lying eyes. | ||
| Don't believe your empty wallets. | ||
| Just let the regime tell you what's really happening. | ||
| I mean, the only thing Orwell got wrong was the year, for crying out loud. | ||
| You know, this really is Big Brother on steroids. | ||
| They are trying to tell you that you are better off even though you can't pay your bills. | ||
| They're trying to tell you you are better off even though you're having to work two or three jobs instead of just one. | ||
| I mean, we aren't even adding full-time jobs anymore to the economy. | ||
| We have lost about 1.8, or excuse me, 1.6 million full-time jobs over | ||
| the last year, and we added 1.8 million part-time ones. | ||
| The economy is hemorrhaging full-time work right now. | ||
| And I think people understand what's going on, because they're living out this economic | ||
| reality in their daily lives. | ||
| They don't need some talking head on TV to try to tell them what's really going on. | ||
| E.J., we hit on the morning show today. | ||
| The distractions that the Biden administration with a compliant mainstream media are utilizing in order to distract ordinary Americans from basically the pain, the economic pain of everyday life. | ||
| And funny enough, you know, you're with the Heritage Foundation, right? | ||
| One of the two present distractions, one of them was inaugurated today, and we're going to hit this a little later on the show, which is AOC's resolutions of impeachment against Associate Justices Alito and Thomas. | ||
| The other distraction, and the compliant media have been following this, have very, very willingly been allowing this new shiny thing, hypnotically, to try and fix America, is of course the Project 2025, right? | ||
| This is what the regime and the media are trying to do, to say, don't think about the | ||
| cost of living, impossibility, the pain, you know, because everyone remembers how good | ||
| economic times were under the last administration, under the Trump administration, until, of | ||
| course, COVID. | ||
| Everyone remembers that. | ||
| And what, you know, as you said, don't believe your lying eyes, especially don't believe | ||
| your lying memories either. | ||
| And it's just distraction from people in these months as we accelerate towards the November | ||
| November 5th election, the distractions to try to prevent Americans from thinking, just | ||
|
unidentified
|
how tough their day-to-day life is. | |
| Let me ask you this question, if I may. | ||
| Is there a difference geographically across the United States from state to state where | ||
| the cost of living—because obviously, this is a national average, right, this June to | ||
| June 2024 figure. | ||
| Are there any states that are doing particularly well and states that are doing particularly | ||
| badly in terms of the cost of living crisis? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Bye. | |
| Well, I think we should break out a couple of different things here. | ||
| In terms of the cost of living crisis, housing is a major component of that. | ||
| And one of the things that we have seen is those areas that have had a disproportionate influx of illegal aliens have seen the cost of housing go up more than average. | ||
| And the reason for that is pretty simple. | ||
| You are putting more people into an area, you are increasing demand for everything, including housing, but you're not actually increasing the supply of housing at a commensurate rate. | ||
| And so you see that a lot in border towns, for example, or border areas of the country. | ||
| But you also are seeing it in places where states like Texas are busing migrants to. | ||
| Now those different blue cities are experiencing the same problem. | ||
| And one other point on the blue cities is that if you look at... And E.J., and New York State as well, I guess. | ||
| Yes, yes, exactly. | ||
| Because that's one of the locations where Governor Abbott, for example, has been busing a lot of these migrants. | ||
| And so, as you get that influx of people, again, you are increasing the demand that all of those people need to survive, necessities like housing. | ||
| And as you increase demand for housing, you're going to push up the price. | ||
| You don't need a PhD in economics to tell you that increasing demand is going to drive prices higher. | ||
| And because you're not actually increasing supply as you increase that demand, sure enough, that's what we've seen. | ||
| We've seen higher prices in those areas. | ||
| So the rate of increase has outpaced The national average. | ||
| But I think another really important thing to point out in the economic disparities today between states is how states have recovered since the pandemic. | ||
| And if you look at job growth, for example, the states like Florida, like Texas, Tennessee, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, those states that opened their economies, they have far exceeded the rest of the country in terms of job growth. | ||
| But places like California, Illinois, New York, those states have seriously lagged behind. | ||
| And sure enough, there's a strong disparity there between liberal Democrat policies and conservative policies. | ||
| E.J., that's a magisterial analysis. | ||
| Very, very grateful. | ||
| So much to break down here. | ||
| I look forward to you coming back on the show and picking some of these figures in greater detail. | ||
| How can, as a public finance economist at the Heritage Foundation, how can folks keep up to date with your analysis and commentary on day-to-day events? | ||
| The best place to find me is going to be over on X, and the handle there is AtRealEJAntoni. | ||
| EJ, thanks very much for coming on the show today. | ||
| Thank you for having me. | ||
| We're going to move now to Jeff Clark from the Center for Renewing America to discuss what Axios … called a long-shot element of a broader legislative push by House Democrats to rein in the Supreme Court after a spate of decisions in June that incensed liberals. | ||
| That's what this is. | ||
| It's an attempt to get back at the Supreme Court. | ||
| So, as you said in the previous segment, the Democrats are trying to distract people's attention from For example, the cost of living crisis, the fact that there is a senile cadaver in chief that the media have been covering up for ages. | ||
| Two distractions, principally, I've noticed over the last 10 days. | ||
| There's the Project 2025, which the media has been hitting nonstop. | ||
| And then AOC today came out Yesterday, excuse me, came out with these resolutions of impeachment against Associate Justices Thomas and Alito. | ||
| Can you sort of give an analysis for us, an anatomy, if you will, of these resolutions? | ||
| What the process is? | ||
| How is it similar to the impeachment resolutions, the two impeachments we saw against Donald Trump? | ||
| What are the statistics? | ||
| that the arithmetic that the House and the Senate will be looking for. | ||
| And do these resolutions have any realistic chance of passing? | ||
| And then I'm going to ask you, if I may, at the end of that, what are the possibilities | ||
| of the GOP might stop firing off resolutions of impeachment in a similar fashion? | ||
| So why don't you start explaining sort of how this, how these resolutions of impeachment will unfold? | ||
| Sure, Ben. | ||
| Well, great to be with you. | ||
| Obviously, we're missing Steve Bannon, and we pray for him. | ||
| You and I have not met in person, but I'm glad to be here with you today to talk about these topics. | ||
| We're basically talking about two things. | ||
| On the one hand, we have the resolution, one for Thomas, one for Alito. | ||
| that AOC is leading. | ||
| And then on the other hand, we have a letter from Senators Wyden and Whitehouse to the Justice Department asking for Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel to investigate Justice Thomas. | ||
| So these are two lawfare efforts, and those lawfare efforts are going forward in parallel. | ||
| And the first thing to recognize about them is that, look, they're designed to Increased costs for the justices. | ||
| They have to get counsel to represent themselves to fend off these challenges. | ||
| And, you know, it's designed to make their lives difficult. | ||
| It's part of the general lawfare effort. | ||
| It's completely illegitimate. | ||
| It's never been launched against Supreme Court justices before. | ||
| We're obviously living in an age where, as my colleague Mark Paoletta was explaining earlier today on the War Room program, this is a situation in which You know, they realize that that they're trying to intimidate the justices because they don't like the fact that the Supreme Court has switched from a largely leftist entity. | ||
| I saw one leftist commentator saying and admitting that for decades they had a hegemony over the Supreme Court. | ||
| And so they don't like the fact that the balance has shifted against them and they're getting actual constitutional decisions. | ||
| And so they've decided that payback is the best way to proceed. | ||
| And they're paying the justices back. | ||
| With this complaint to try to get a special counsel and with these impeachment resolutions. | ||
| So, you know, to jump to your question about what the likely prospect of the impeachment resolution is passing, I mean, I'd tell you it's a big goose egg, right? | ||
| There is zero chance that either of these resolutions against Thomas or Alito two of our greatest justices are going to actually get a | ||
| majority of votes in the House and then through and then teeing up a Senate trial. | ||
| That's just not going to happen. | ||
| So I don't think you need to do a lot of complicated vote analysis or any kind of. | ||
| of whipping of votes for this. | ||
| I think it's just never going to come up on the agenda. | ||
| It's a political approach. | ||
| It's designed to inflict fear and pain on the justices. | ||
| That's what it's about, Ben. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Let me get this right. | |
| This resolution needs to be dealt with in this legislature, right? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Anything dies if you go to another Congress. | ||
| So this is, you know, it's dead on arrival. | ||
| It's a messaging thing, right? | ||
| And look as well at who the other co-sponsors are. | ||
| Ben, it's Rashida Tlaib, it's Ilhan Omar, it's, you know, lame duck Jamal Bowman, Jasmine Crockett, Barbara Lee. | ||
| I mean, it's a it's a who's who of the crazy leftists in the House. | ||
| The usual suspects. | ||
| I actually don't have a, I actually don't have, like I've been, as I was saying on the morning show, I've just come out a couple of months ago out of a five year long number of cases in a number of different courts, but most substantially a criminal case that went on for four or five years. | ||
| I was totally acquitted. | ||
| This thing took all of my money, all of my time, all of my emotional energy. | ||
| I don't, that said, right, and it was a totally political prosecution. | ||
| But I can understand where the Democrats are coming from. | ||
| I can understand AOC, where she's coming from. | ||
| She thinks Donald Trump is an existential threat to the public. | ||
| Either she does or she doesn't. | ||
| And she's politically posturing. | ||
| My principal problem isn't with AOC and this resolution of impeachment. | ||
| My problem is why the GOP doesn't do the same thing back. | ||
| To the Democrats. | ||
| That's my, that's the thing that gets me here. | ||
| For example, for example, one of, and we mentioned this on the morning show earlier, one of the charges in this article of resolution against Clarence Thomas is refusal to recuse from matters involving his spouse's financial interest in cases before the court now. | ||
| There's either the suggestion that Clarence Thomas has allowed himself to be swayed, or perhaps more fundamentally, and Clarence Thomas has denied this outright, but there is perhaps a more substantial argument that it's necessary at all times to maintain the appearance, right? | ||
| Maintain the absolute appearances at all times of propriety. | ||
| Which is certainly binding on the lower courts, right? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Judge Quan Mershan, right? | |
| His daughter was fundraising, is a fundraiser, fundraising for Democrats on the back of the I am not saying that Judge Mehrshan allowed himself to be swayed by that. | ||
| It's possible he's a Republican. | ||
| It's possible that his daughter had arrived at her anti-MAGA principles all by herself. | ||
| That's possible. | ||
| But the importance of maintaining The appearances of propriety should be just as binding on the lower courts as it is on the Supreme Court. | ||
| And in fact, I don't think the Supreme Court is even bound by this, by the measures on the lower courts. | ||
| Where are AOC's resolutions of articles of impeachment against Judge Mehrshan? | ||
| If she hasn't tabled any on this point, why haven't the GOP? | ||
| So Ben, first thing I would say is that everyone needs to understand that Judge Murshan in Manhattan is definitely a Democrat, and he had donated to Democrat causes before. | ||
| I do think that his family overall is getting very rich from the political operation that his daughter is running, and he should have recused. | ||
| That's just one of the problems in that case. | ||
| The Trump immunity case, I think, is really going to make that prosecution very difficult to continue. | ||
| And I completely agree with you that, and my colleague, Mark, earlier this morning, he defended Justice Thomas and his separation from his wife, Ginny Thomas, and her activities. | ||
| And he used the example of Judge Reinhardt, who was the lion of the left out on the Ninth Circuit when he was there, and his own wife's interests really creating a much clearer case for recusal and that not going anywhere. | ||
| And then Marty Ginsburg, who was Justice Ginsburg's husband, he was actually my tax professor. | ||
| And he was involved through his law firm in cases that wound up before the Supreme Court. | ||
| The left said nothing about that. | ||
| So there's a total double standard going on, as you point out. | ||
| And look, Mark is a one-man wrecking crew to defend Justice Thomas in particular. | ||
| Let me say something about how totally ridiculous the impeachment resolution is against Justice Alito. | ||
| He's accused of not recusing from three cases. | ||
| Trump v. | ||
| U.S., that's the immunity case. | ||
| Trump v. Anderson, that's the 14th Amendment Section 3 case of trying to keep Trump off the ballot. | ||
| And then Fisher v. | ||
| U.S., which is the case about the January 6th defendants and whether they were faced with an interpretation of 18 U.S.C. 1512 C2 that was totally off board. And they wanted him to recuse | ||
| from that, and they say it was an impeachable offense for him not to recuse from those | ||
| cases because his wife flew an American flag upside down and because she flew the Appeal to Heaven flag, | ||
| which historically goes back to the nation's founding, excuse me, and that George | ||
| Washington had actually used during his day. And they say this is because those two flags are tied | ||
| to the quote-unquote insurrection. | ||
| You know, this is, you know, poppycock. | ||
| Both of the flags have, well, obviously our main American flag has a long historical providence. | ||
| Flying it upside down if you think the country is in distress has a long historical providence. | ||
| The appeal to heaven flag, the same thing. | ||
| These are not, they weren't flying flags at the house that related to the quote unquote insurrection. | ||
| Which is dubious in and of itself. | ||
| I don't think an insurrection actually occurred. | ||
| There's just an insurrection narrative from the mainstream media. | ||
| This is the most ridiculous impeachment resolution I've ever seen. | ||
| I've never seen one written like this. | ||
| I've never seen one this thin. | ||
| It's a publicity stunt, Ben. | ||
| And really, you know, if anything, the House should censure the sponsors of this for having put this resolution forward. | ||
| I couldn't agree more. | ||
| And you know what? | ||
| I'm going to put these points to one of my all-time favourite congressmen who's coming on the show in just a couple of moments, Congressman Goode. | ||
| Geoff Clark, thanks very much for breaking this down for us. | ||
| This is obviously going to be a growing story. | ||
| Let's have you back on the show in the next few days to give us an update on how this unrolls. | ||
| In the meantime, how can folks get hold of you at the Centre for Renewing America? | ||
| Thanks, Ben. | ||
| So I'm on X at JeffClarkUS and also on Getter at that handle. | ||
| And then on Truth Social, I'm RealJeffClark. | ||
| And the Center for Renewing America is AmericaRenewing.com. | ||
| And you can find both me and Mark Pale out of there. | ||
| Jeff, thanks very much. | ||
| We'll catch up with you soon. | ||
| God bless. | ||
| Thanks, Ben. | ||
| OK, we're a couple of minutes away from the break now, but let's get Congressman Bob Good on here. | ||
| I always wanted to see a resolution in the House of Representatives. | ||
| Congressman changing your name to Congressman Bob Fantastic, because you really are. | ||
| Can you, before the break, just give us a quick analysis. | ||
| What are people saying? | ||
| Because we want to talk about your own situation here in Virginia. | ||
| But what are people saying about AOC's resolution right now in the GOP? | ||
| Well, I don't hear actually a lot about it, except from the media. | ||
| There's not a lot of talk on the House floor. | ||
| Obviously, it's not expected to go anywhere. | ||
| I don't think it'll be brought up for a vote, certainly on the House floor. | ||
| But there's no basis for it. | ||
| You know, the left, as you know, they try to accomplish through the judicial system, through the legal system, that which they cannot accomplish through the legislative process. | ||
| They love the bureaucracy, the unelected department agencies and bureaucrats who aren't accountable | ||
| to the American people. | ||
| They try to make law through executive action, through rulemaking, that sort of thing, because | ||
| the American people are not with them through their representatives to make law. | ||
| And so that's why they try to go after the court when they don't like what the court | ||
| does. | ||
| They want to pack the court. | ||
| They want to remove members from the court. | ||
| They think constitutionalism means doing what Democrats want you to do. | ||
| As you said on the morning show today, the Democrats have this psychology that everyone needs to do what they want when they're in power, and everyone needs to do what they want when they're out of power. | ||
| And it's a crying shame that not you, but so many of your GOP colleagues seem willing to indulge that bullying constantly. | ||
| I think this is an example of AOC's resolution. | ||
| Is there any chance – look, Just in one minute, you can answer this yes or no. | ||
| Is there any chance to have, on the basis, on the same arguments that AOC is using against Associate Justices Thomas and Alita, is there any chance of a resolution of impeachment being sent, being tabled against Judge Mehrshan on the same basis that his family has a financial interest in a prosecution, a political prosecution? | ||
| Well, he certainly has abused his power, as you know. | ||
| With the gag order that he placed to try to prevent President Trump from being able to make his case in the court of public opinion, to defend himself with what he's done, as you've documented so well, where he's allowing his family to profit, profit tens of millions of dollars off of the fundraising that they're doing off this very trial, the way that he has ruled time and again in favor of the prosecution against the defense. | ||
| So he certainly should be held accountable. | ||
| And that's a great point that you raise. | ||
| Folks, we've got Congressman Bob Good here. | ||
| We'll be back in just a couple of seconds after this short break to find out what's happening down in Virginia, whether there'll be recounts or what have you. | ||
| Stay tuned and we'll be back in just a couple of moments. | ||
|
unidentified
|
God bless. | |
| Let's continue the conversation with Congressman Good right now. | ||
| Congressman, what's happening down there in the 5th District in Virginia? | ||
| Well, we are filing our recount challenge today, and that'll begin ASAP, as soon as possible here, and we'll see what the courts, the judges, allow us to do. | ||
| But we want to just make sure that every legal legitimate vote is counted, and only every legal legitimate vote, and that the ultimate result reflects the true intent of every lawful participating voter across Virginia's 5th District. | ||
| And so we're going to pursue that rigorously, and we're going to hope and pray that we will | ||
| have the outcome that we believe is best for the country, best for the Commonwealth of Virginia, | ||
| best for President Trump's ability to win Virginia, and best for the people of the | ||
|
unidentified
|
5th District and our ability to hold this seat. What's the time frame for this to play out? | |
| I think it'll take two or three weeks. | ||
| It depends on the judge and the court. | ||
| There'll be a three-judge panel that will preside over this and how rigorous they allow this investigation to be. | ||
| We're going to ask for a full hand recount, a paper ballot match, and then we're going to ask to review some of the concerns that we have, the things that just don't quite look right to us. | ||
| And while there may be mistakes, we hope that will be uncovered, just simple mathematical errors, but also there's some other things that we are concerned about during the process. | ||
| I will just tell you though, Ben, it has further just revealed how vulnerable our election systems are and how important it is for us to get it right, a 50-state solution to secure our elections, because we almost operate them as if we have the presumption that no one | ||
| would ever try to do anything dishonest. No one would ever try to cheat. No one would | ||
| ever try to do anything nefarious. | ||
| And our elections are not secure to the degree that they should be. And there's too many | ||
| things that are in place now across the country that facilitate or allow people with ill intent | ||
| to do things that would compromise the integrity of our elections. | ||
| As the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, I suppose hindsight, because you are effective, | ||
| with hindsight, it's possible, I think, to have guessed that the regime might have tried | ||
| to do all it can to stop you being returned in November. | ||
| Can people donate? | ||
| You're fundraising for this legal operation. | ||
| Can people donate out of state or only from the Commonwealth itself? | ||
| No, all across the country people can. | ||
| Thankfully, many have, but we can use that help. | ||
| It's bobgoodforcongress.com slash recount. | ||
| bobgoodforcongress.com slash recount. | ||
| But I would tell you, Ben, ever since I've been in Congress, I've said many times on the House floor in speeches and interviews and back in my district, we will never save the country until it becomes more important to us to leave having made a difference than it is to see how long we can | ||
| stay. | ||
| And while I hope that I'm able to stay a little longer, and I hope that we'll prevail in this | ||
| recount, it's an uphill challenge. | ||
| There's a high bar to get a court to allow you to investigate everything. | ||
| But the bottom line, I've done what I think is right. | ||
| I believe I was called to run. | ||
| I've worked and served with integrity. | ||
| I've kept my word. | ||
| And I'm willing to put it in the hands of the Lord. | ||
| I've done everything that's possible within my control, and we'll leave the ultimate results | ||
| to him. | ||
| Thanks very much for coming on the show and giving us this update. | ||
| I hope you'll come back and keep us posted. | ||
| We're very much praying for you. | ||
| The war room, as you know, when there was Steve sitting here in the hot seat, the war room and the war room posse was absolutely 100% behind you from the moment. | ||
| And they still are. | ||
| You have a lot of support on this show. | ||
| Steve is one of the most courageous conservative warriors in the country. | ||
| Our prayers are with him. | ||
| Our support is with him. | ||
| Please pass that on. | ||
| Thank you, my friend. | ||
| Congressman, thank you very much. | ||
| God bless. | ||
| Let's remember Congressman Good in our press, because they're heroes. | ||
| There are very few in Congress, most of them are sociopaths. | ||
| There are very few genuinely good people who are willing to stick their neck out and actually persistently fight for the issues. | ||
| There are too many people who will do the MAGA platitudes when it comes to selection, and then they're nowhere to be seen once it comes to tabling amendments. | ||
| There's a guy there who actually had his shoulder to the wheel. | ||
| And I absolutely hope that something can be sorted out in this timeframe. | ||
| We have a clip, I think, from Denver to introduce Colonel Harvey. | ||
| We're going to talk very briefly about Ukraine and Gaza. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Now everyone is waiting for November. | |
| Americans are waiting for November in Europe, Middle East, in the Pacific. | ||
| The whole world is looking to autumn, looking to November. | ||
| And truly speaking, Putin It's time to sit out, to step out of the shadows, to make | ||
| strong decisions, work, to act and not to wait for November or any other months to this end. | ||
| We must be strong and uncompromising. | ||
| What happens to that brave young man and his country if Donald Trump becomes president | ||
| and, you know, and does and, you know, makes good on his threats? | ||
| Can I say I love Vladimir Zelensky? | ||
| This guy stood up and delivered for his nation, for NATO, for the alliance against Putin. | ||
| We ought to cherish Volodymyr Zelensky. | ||
| What happens if Trump is elected is not a good thing. | ||
| Trump has been pretty clear that he does not value their fierce loyalty, their fierce courage, and I for one hope that Whoever is elected, they will stand behind Volodymyr Zelensky. | ||
| I worry if it's Donald Trump. | ||
| Welcome back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Colonel Harvey, good afternoon to you. | |
| Good afternoon. | ||
| Glad to be here. | ||
| So you heard the MSNBC clip there, Joyless Reed. | ||
| The one thing in the list that they were saying that we needed, you know, the one thing I didn't hear, you know, Zelensky's loyal pro-NATO, pro-alliance, though obviously Ukraine isn't a member of the alliance, against Putin. | ||
| The one thing, and instead of Joyless Reed nodding and lapping it up, the one thing I didn't hear that there's no allusion to, Talking about Ukraine. | ||
| We're taxpaying Americans, right? | ||
| The forgotten part of this particular equation. | ||
| There's no reference—again and again and again, no reference to taxpaying Americans. | ||
| They didn't do it on this occasion, but the best that they can do is say, if we don't stop Putin now in Ukraine, he's going to roll in all the way down into continental Europe, all the way sort of across Germany, all the way down to Spain, France and Portugal. | ||
| Let's not forget that Russia has A smaller GDP than the state of New York, spread across this huge geographical entity, has a per capita GDP less than Costa Rica. | ||
| It's not going anywhere. | ||
| The whole thing that they're sitting there waiting to invade Ukraine so that they can roll in and then take the rest of continental Europe is a fiction. | ||
| But that's what they say. | ||
| They didn't say it on this occasion. | ||
| But there's no reference to America's in any interest to America's here. | ||
| Colonel Harvey, right now NATO is having its 75th anniversary. | ||
| in Ukraine. | ||
| You might remember that just a couple of months before Russia invaded Ukraine, Emmanuel Macron, | ||
| the president of France, had said that NATO was brain dead and on life support. | ||
| And then, a few months later, this engineered war, war engineered by NATO, took off. | ||
| And then, lo and behold, NATO hasn't been stronger, hasn't been healthier, hasn't been more needed as an institution that had no existential reason after the collapse of the Berlin Wall 25 years ago, after the collapse of Soviet communism. | ||
| And now, after one provoked war after another, it has a new lease of life. | ||
| Is that the message coming out after this three-day conference in Washington, D.C., right now, Colonel Harvey? | ||
| Well, first off, thanks for having me. | ||
| And what I'd like to say is that the MSNBC hosts were basically detached from reality and the facts and the history of what Trump did to strengthen NATO. | ||
| He was the best thing for NATO that has occurred in the last 35 years, because he drove the increase of annual spending up almost $400 billion by the commitments that he got NATO to make. | ||
| And then any other increase on top of that is directly the result of the war in Ukraine. | ||
| Number two, you're absolutely right about The scaremongering about, you know, Russia being a threat to move on the rest of Europe. | ||
| Ukraine, the bigger issue right now is, you know, NATO is agreeing to give more weapons, F-16s, organized training, more long-range missiles, and more money for a war effort that there is no plan to win. | ||
| There is no way that they can win. | ||
| And they have Dribbled in increases every few months, but they never brought in enough to allow Ukraine to win. | ||
| Ukraine has got tremendous disadvantages in resources, manpower, and equipment. | ||
| They're against a very dug-in foe that now occupies part of their territory. | ||
| They have no strategic advantages, and they don't have strategic depth. | ||
| There's no way to win. | ||
| And the Ukrainian people and others are paying the cost, Ukrainians more directly. | ||
| So, you know, these people, again, you know, don't seem to understand that NATO is managing a conflict to an unacceptable outcome where Ukraine is paying the price. | ||
| Trump, differently, is going to take a very different approach to bring war termination with an understanding that we need to check Russia And get them to the table. | ||
| And if they don't come to the table realistically, that we will put significant increases in support to Ukraine. | ||
| And that's in the policy platform of the Republican Party that the Trump team approved. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| So, what is the situation, Colonel Harvey? | ||
| One year ago, at NATO's annual conference in Vilnius, against President Zelensky's fondest hopes, there was no formal invitation or even timetable for when a formal invitation to join NATO might arise. | ||
| A lot of speculation this annual conference, which is, as I say, the 75th anniversary of NATO, that something more solid, more concrete would emerge. | ||
| I have said on this show that's not going to happen. | ||
| The reason that's not going to happen is because President Biden, as a gaffe, as a slipper, because He is slightly seen now. | ||
| He said not in the Time magazine's interview, but in the transcript that Time magazine published | ||
| of the interview. | ||
| He says there that he ruled out the NATO-ification of Ukraine. | ||
| And that's not the administration's official position. | ||
| It's not NATO's official position. | ||
| But Biden said it quite clearly. | ||
| It was garbled in that syntax that he has, which is why I think a lot of people missed it. | ||
| But he says in that transcript quite clearly he's ruled it out. | ||
| So I'm not personally expecting any official timetable to joining. | ||
| What I am expecting is some kind of shiny toy that will distract, that will be a safe Well, I guess two main things. | ||
| to it, that NATO or the Americans can offer Ukraine, but it won't be membership. | ||
| Why don't you give us an update and say what the actual situation is now at the conclusion | ||
| of this three-day-long conference? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Colonel Harvey. | |
| Well, I guess two main things. | ||
| At the 75th anniversary of the founding of NATO, they've declared that when the conditions | ||
| are right, Ukraine will join the European Union and NATO. | ||
| The second thing that they declared is that they're going to make more moves to punish China for its support of Russia's war in Ukraine. | ||
| Now, the conditions being right, you have to understand this, and everyone just listen. | ||
| The rules are for NATO. | ||
| In the Charter of NATO, it requires that no country can become a member of NATO if they have any territorial disputes at all. | ||
| Ukraine has territorial disputes. | ||
| And until all those territorial disputes are resolved and accepted by the international community, NATO will not bring on board the Ukraine government. | ||
| And that would require, also, unanimity within NATO. | ||
| And you may not get unanimity even if they met those conditions. | ||
| So, they're a long ways off from being able to become part of the NATO alliance. | ||
| Colonel Harvey, you were at the National Security Council when Donald Trump was President, and I guess you know something of geography as well. | ||
| Perhaps you can help me out here with a confusion that I have. | ||
| What has China to do or Taiwan to do with the North Atlantic? | ||
| Well, NATO has been expanding its reach into other areas of the world. | ||
| You know, Indian Ocean and, you know, making partnerships and providing training and advice to countries in Asia. | ||
| China has an issue here, which is anything that weakens the West or distracts the West from being able to prepare to challenge China where its priority interests lie, like with Taiwan or on the boundaries of Japan or in the South China Sea, that's strategically good for China. | ||
| And it takes very little effort on their part, and as far as resources, to enable Russia, | ||
| which then diminishes and distracts the Western alliance from the larger threat looming from Beijing. | ||
| I'm thinking here, as I try to, I'm actually an international correspondent on this show, | ||
| which means I don't normally dig in so much to American domestic politics. | ||
| But on the international aspect here, with regards to NATO, and trying to be impartial. | ||
| About my analysis of what's going on in the world. | ||
| Thinking one moment for the nations which are skeptical or hesitant or cynical even towards the United States in particular, but NATO in general. | ||
| Does this expansion, this mission creep which you mentioned on behalf of NATO, not go somewhat To justify the concerns of countries like Russia and like China that NATO is actually a belligerent force that is way beyond what its original founding principle 75 years were, and is something that they need to be concerned about. | ||
| And if that is the case, does it not legitimize in a certain light Russia's interest in coming into Ukraine to stop Ukraine from joining NATO? | ||
| Well, we could have a whole show about the lead up to the Russian invasion of the eastern part of Ukraine, that's for sure. | ||
| There were plenty of strategic indicators that Russia was going to make that move that the Biden administration ignored. | ||
| And quite frankly, they sent signals that they weren't going to do anything. | ||
| They withdrew people from the embassy. | ||
| They did other things that sent signals that we were not going to take a stand. | ||
| I guess it was because the intelligence assessments made the case that Ukraine would fall very quickly, so they overestimated Russia's capability and underestimated Ukrainian defensive capabilities and will to fight. | ||
| Colonel Harvey, can I just put in there, there is another interpretation of these events, that it wasn't a case of misreading those signals. | ||
| It was a fact that NATO wanted, America wanted Russia to invade Ukraine, because NATO needed a new lease of life. | ||
| And politically, this war in the West, because you obviously have to tax people to fund a war, you need to tax an organisation in order to raise funding for an organisation like NATO. | ||
| Under a certain aspect, if you want to look at this really cynically, But if you want to look at this really cynically, Russia did NATO and the United States and the military-industrial complex a favor in invading Ukraine. | ||
| America has not lost anything out of this. | ||
| But NATO has, as I was saying, a new lease of life. | ||
| Well, I don't actually subscribe to that theory because I've not seen evidence to support Those calculations and decisions within NATO, and I was tracking the developing intelligence leading up to the invasion, and understanding the calculations. | ||
| I think ineptitude, not understanding the real world, naivete, By Biden and the Biden administration, Jake Sullivan and Tony Blinken are part of that. | ||
| I think a stronger President Trump being in office would have deterred that from happening. | ||
| Notice under Obama, Biden, and now Biden and Kamala Harris, that's when Russia has moved to take parts of Georgia, take Crimea. | ||
| The Obama-Biden team toppled a Russian-leaning Ukrainian government. | ||
| You know, eight years ago or so, 2014. | ||
| So, you know, there's a lot of history here that American people just do not understand how we've been meddling in Ukraine and that part of the world. | ||
| And Russia's taken advantage under Democrat administrations, specifically Obama's and Biden's, not with Bush or with Trump. | ||
| So clear cut Rail politique, being clear about your red lines, and being clear about responding with authority and with consequence sends a real message to aggressors. | ||
| And we don't have that from this Biden team. | ||
| Absolutely true. | ||
| Colonel Harvey, I know here on The War Room, I think we subscribe a little more to the Professor John Mearsheimer hypothesis that this war was engineered right from the beginning, right from the get-go. | ||
| Very grateful for you to come in, however, to give a slightly alternative narrative to that and that gives us all something to think | ||
|
unidentified
|
about. | |
| I hope, look, we also wanted to talk about Gaza today. | ||
| There's not enough time for that. | ||
| I hope you'll come back on the show imminently and give us a breakdown on what's going over there. | ||
| In the meantime, quickly, how can folks get in touch with you | ||
| and follow your analysis? | ||
|
unidentified
|
First, at DerekHarvey.org, and you can contact me and see some of my work, | |
| as well as inquire about having me come and speak. | ||
| And then at Colonel D. Harvey on X. | ||
| Colonel Harvey, thanks so much. | ||
| My thanks to our great production team in Washington D.C. | ||
| and in Denver. | ||
| Catch you tomorrow. |
Export Selection