Speaker | Time | Text |
---|---|---|
unidentified
|
Have you ever wondered how the deep state works? | |
Sixty have voted to move forward with impeachment and he hasn't presented his first finding. | ||
Stephen K. Bannon and Kash Patel present Government Gangsters. | ||
So-called Russia dossier. | ||
A broader conspiracy. | ||
President Trump called it a must-see film. | ||
Did you wipe yourself? | ||
What, like with a cloth or something? | ||
Hey, no. | ||
Steve Bannon says it's the most important film he's been a part of. | ||
It's gonna be a blockbuster. | ||
This film is more important now than ever. | ||
This is the type of movie that could change this election. | ||
unidentified
|
You don't have to go to a crowded theater to watch it. | |
Go to warroom.film and stream Government Gangsters. | ||
You can't fight what you don't know. | ||
This is the primal scream of a dying regime. | ||
Pray for our enemies. | ||
Use the code RAV24 for 24% off. | ||
This is the primal scream of a dying regime. | ||
unidentified
|
Pray for our enemies. | |
Because we're going medieval on these people. | ||
You're not going to get a free shot on all these networks lying about the people. | ||
unidentified
|
The people have had a belly full of it. | |
I know you don't like hearing that. | ||
I know you've tried to do everything in the world to stop that, but you're not going to stop it. | ||
It's going to happen. | ||
And where do people like that go to share the big lie? | ||
unidentified
|
MAGA Media. | |
I wish in my soul, I wish that any of these people had a conscience. | ||
unidentified
|
Ask yourself, what is my task and what is my purpose? | |
If that answer is to save my country, this country will be saved. | ||
unidentified
|
War Room. Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | |
If someone were to violate the law and not certify the election at the local level, we will come for you. | ||
So any local certifier thinking of skirting the law and not certifying the vote, don't even think about it because we'll get you. | ||
Jocelyn Benson, you are a clown. | ||
We're going to get into that much later in this show, but I want to start off with a story that we are not going to let up on, not just because, like I said a few days ago, I actually think with our first guest, Dr. Darren J. Beatty, that we will show The United States government was intimately involved with the arrest of Pavel Durov in France, of course, the CEO of Telegram. | ||
There's been a lot of developments on that front. | ||
He, of course, being released from custody, I think awaiting trial. | ||
But until then, there's a lot of information that's unraveling, that's coming out that I want Darren to walk us through. | ||
Of course, the Atlantic Council, always involved. | ||
They always seem to find a way. | ||
Alexander Vindman, too. | ||
But Darren, why don't you give us the latest on this situation? | ||
Absolutely. | ||
It's a big story. | ||
It involves a lot of interesting intersections of both geopolitics and sort of the censorship cat and mouse game. | ||
We have a fresh new piece up at revolver.news that gets into the intricacies of all of it. | ||
But we featured a video that we found published by the Atlantic Council's DFR lab, which anyone who's been following the great work of People like Mike Benz and the Twitter files generally and all of the weaponization hearings. | ||
Those people will know, or going back to Revolver News' color revolution coverage from years ago, you'll know that the Atlantic Council is a nefarious organization. | ||
It is one of those NGOs that functions as a cutout for the U.S. | ||
security establishment. | ||
And the DFR lab is it's basically censorship institute that's been a pioneer In weaponizing the so-called disinformation scam as a censorship predicate, a censorship pretext. | ||
And this group has been funded by the U.S. | ||
government. | ||
It's funded by the British government. | ||
It's also curiously funded by a major Ukrainian oligarch, Viktor Pinchuk, which is interesting because they did a whole segment two months ago attacking none other than Telegram. | ||
Why are they attacking Telegram? | ||
Because in their view, It's not sufficiently censorious of on-the-ground war material that is embarrassing or contra | ||
Indicates the policies advocated by the US government with respect to Ukraine. | ||
And so it's in line with our earlier conversation, Natalie, on why Telegram is upsetting so many stakeholders in the censorship regime. | ||
One of the reasons is it's a major source of unmediated on the ground footage. | ||
And information from hot-button conflict zones, principally Ukraine. | ||
And so the fact that the Atlantic Council, with such close ties to the U.S. | ||
establishment, put out a video targeting Telegram no more than two months before his arrest in France, I think it's not dispositive, but it's certainly powerful circumstantial evidence that the U.S. | ||
regime, deep state, Had a very heavy hand in the arrest of Durov. | ||
They were certainly telegraphing, I think, their interest in going after a social media platform that doesn't comply with regulators here in the United States, or just more broadly, the administrative state, the deep state, whatever you want to call it. | ||
Of course, those of you who watched the show yesterday, you saw my long-winded rant going off on Mark Zuckerberg, how his letter that House Republicans are hailing as a, quote, big win for free speech is nothing but it's actually sort of a telltale sign that more censorship is indeed coming. | ||
But Darren, I'd love to get your thoughts on how that letter, the timing of that sort of interplays with this story more broadly. | ||
And if you agree that you think this letter should not be hailed as a victory, but rather sort of an opening salvo for what could be the sort of second front of the censorship war against the American people ahead of the 2024 election. | ||
Well, you know, that's a really fantastic question, Natalie. | ||
And the intersections are multifarious here. | ||
The story of Mark Zuckerberg is a story of A very concerted and to some degree successful rebranding PR campaign that involves part of the packaging of, you know, Zuckerberg and the wind sail or, you know, water skiing, whatever it is with the American flag. | ||
More recently, Zuckerberg has said positive things about Trump. | ||
I think he praised his reaction to the assassination attempt. | ||
And now we have this kind of mea culpa and acknowledgement of Facebook's role in censorship in 2020. | ||
But of course, also the larger story that, you know, anyone who's been paying any remote attention doesn't even need to be cutting edge people on War Room and people read Revolver. | ||
Even the average citizen by now knows that Facebook and other companies, including Twitter under previous management, censored heavily in 2020 at the behest of government organizations like the Department of Homeland Security and like these NGO cutouts like the Atlantic Council. | ||
So that's well known. | ||
And so the fact that Zuckerberg is talking about this now is not new information. | ||
What's new is that he's the one saying it. | ||
Now, why would he be doing that? | ||
I think there are two factors to consider. | ||
One is there is this broader sort of alignment of many within the tech elite toward MAGA either directly or sort of this adjacency playing footsie. | ||
You have the most prominent figure being Elon who's endorsed Trump and then sort of more minor but still important venture capitalists like, you know, David Sachs and others. | ||
And so there's this broader realignment and it doesn't come out of nowhere. | ||
No, Elon's not an idiot. | ||
And yes, I think a lot of this comes out of conviction, but a lot of this comes out of an understanding that In this day and age, in this environment, you can't go halfway. | ||
You can't really be neutral. | ||
You can't be part on one side, part on the other because the fact that he's gone out even a little bit... | ||
means that the regime has him in the crosshairs. | ||
He's already a tech vector. | ||
And so either Trump wins and basically protects his business interests, or he's in big trouble. | ||
He's in Durov-level trouble. | ||
And I think that, you know, Durov himself learned that neutrality is not as easy as it would seem. | ||
You know, he tried to be neutral in this geopolitical sense of, You know, rebuffing Russia's entreaties. | ||
Russia wanted him to censor and give information. | ||
He said no, and he had a big falling out with the Russian government. | ||
But then the U.S. | ||
tried to get him to do the same thing. | ||
He said no to the U.S. | ||
And he said no, probably, to France and every other party. | ||
And so he thought, oh, I can live in the UAE, which has sort of emerged as this geopolitical Switzerland, and try to live this life of neutrality with a Privacy based app and that hasn't worked out so well. | ||
And so he tried neutrality in a certain way and it hasn't worked. | ||
And in a different context I think Elon and these tech moguls are learning that it's harder to do that. | ||
And so Zuckerberg's recent gestures Maybe signaling that he understands if he has to pick a side at this point, he might be leaning more toward the Elon side. | ||
And the Elon has already kind of provided some social cover by going first. | ||
Just a quick thing about Facebook's backstory. | ||
You know, going all the way back to 2016, Facebook became the nemesis of the left because of the ridiculous Cambridge Analytica scandal. | ||
And the left never forgave Facebook. | ||
And Facebook thought that it could sort of compensate for that great sin against the left orthodoxy by leaning so hard in the other direction in 2020. | ||
And that's where all this esoteric came. | ||
But the thing is, all they ended up doing was infuriating patriotic Americans who understand that they played a major role in election meddling in 2020. | ||
But they didn't really ingratiate themselves to the left that never forgave that. | ||
And so they were in this, you know, worst of all worlds type position. | ||
And again, so I think Mark Zuckerberg understands that that's no longer tenable for Facebook. | ||
And he kind of has to choose sides at a certain point. | ||
And now he seems to be leaning in the direction of where Elon has has gone. | ||
The letters clearly a sigh up, and House Republicans are too dumb and stupid to rush in and call it a victory, just giving them exactly what they want. | ||
I know I certainly hit a nerve with the rant I did yesterday. | ||
The hacker group Anonymous, the audience may recall, they were big more in the 2010s, but they would hack world governments, all these large political movements. | ||
Then they sort of went woke, or maybe they just got co-opted by the CIA, who knows? | ||
But they started tweeting at me, threatening me after that rant. | ||
They said I should get a far right-wing provocateur tattooed on my forehead. | ||
I'm considering it, but I think I'm gonna humbly decline. | ||
But speaking of right-wing provocateurs, there's a new video coming out. | ||
Nancy Pelosi admitting that the January 6th security failures were Her fault, she owns it. | ||
Not a conspiracy theory, her own words. | ||
But I'd love if you could sort of walk the audience through the significance of that clip and how it dovetails whether it's a pipe bomb investigation or just all January 6th developments more broadly. | ||
Absolutely. | ||
I mean, there's a lot of dimensions to this, and one of the dimensions is the security. | ||
I mean, there are a number of things that went together that allowed January 6th to unfold the way that it did. | ||
One is the role of these kind of provocateurs with a very questionable providence and intent. | ||
People like Reyevs, people like the group congregated at the Peace Monument, And of course, the pipe bomb and it's very suspicious timing and all the details in there. | ||
But then there's a larger question of security as to why they were able to do that in the first place. | ||
And it's not as though the Capitol had just ordinary security on a day that anyone would understand you need heightened security. | ||
After all, just any time Trump's speaking in an area, that's a reason to have heightened security. | ||
But here Trump's speaking in that area, not at the Capitol, but in D.C. | ||
close enough. | ||
He's speaking in that area with a big crowd on a day that this Controversial certification proceeding was to happen. | ||
It doesn't take a genius in security to know that this is going to be a very high profile and targeted event and you need, at the very least, heightened security. | ||
But they didn't even have heightened security. | ||
They didn't even have normal security. | ||
They seem to have uniquely poor security. | ||
And now we're learning more about Nancy Pelosi's role in this, which Um, is questionable to say the least. | ||
Now, I don't know if we can really put it all on her shoulders. | ||
I think there's blame to go around there. | ||
But it is very weird that every single government agency we now know had Vance warning, they had informants littered in every single militia group that they ultimately blamed on this. | ||
So there were informants, they were presumably informed in advance, and yet they seem to have gone out of their way to create the conditions that could allow for the chaos that ensued. | ||
So that they could promote this narrative of domestic terror, which of course has become the number one pretext whereby the regime has weaponized the national security institutions politically against Trump supporters across the country. | ||
So Nancy Pelosi, by virtue of her failure in this regard, certainly bears culpability. | ||
And Darren, we've got to jump to break. | ||
I want to hold you through. | ||
I've got a few more questions for you. | ||
But Warren Posse, in the meantime, I know I usually send you to birchgold.com slash Bannon, but we are evolving here in the War Room. | ||
You can now text Bannon to 989898. | ||
I think they have some free silver, free gold. | ||
You can learn why that has always been a hedge against inflation. | ||
Price controls all the socialists. | ||
And yes, I use that word intentionally. | ||
Economic policies that Kamala Harris wants. | ||
We'll be right back after this break. | ||
unidentified
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Bamm. | |
Welcome back to The War of We've got to make sure you're checking out sacredhumanhealth.com for the best grass-fed beef liver magnesium, all the supplements you could ever need, and more at that sacredhumanhealth.com. | ||
You're going to support this show. | ||
We've still got Dr. Darren J. Beattie down the line. | ||
Darren, before we let you go, I just want you to wrap up sort of what the audience should be looking for This is a major inflection point in the censorship story. | ||
definitely in just the opening stages, but of this back and forth between the broader | ||
kind of global government, which the UN would probably euphemistically refer to it as, and | ||
their crusade against Telegram, Pavel Durov, and what you think this means here at home. | ||
This is a major inflection point in the censorship story. | ||
Before the arrest of Durov, we actually saw the disinformation industry in retreat. | ||
The disinformation industry that the Atlantic Council helped to spearhead, the organization | ||
that was targeting Durov and Telegram. | ||
You know, with the Twitter files, with Elon's acquisition of Twitter, such that the disinformation operative they couldn't censor in the same way in the platform under Elon's management, even major censorship outposts like the Stanford Internet Observatory are now defunct. | ||
So the system and the regime is very much in a kind of retreat posture, certainly compared to the high watermark of censorship in 2020. | ||
And so the Durov arrest marks a kind of counterpart to the arrest and conviction of US citizen Doug Mackey, who was convicted of a felon for memes mocking Hillary Clinton. | ||
That says, if you do speech on the internet or elsewhere that we don't like, we might not be able to deplatform you as effectively, but we'll just put you in prison now because The disinformation scam that we can no longer implement through censorship, we have now codified through an innovative interpretation of an old statute. | ||
We have now codified this into our criminal legal code. | ||
And so that's for ordinary citizens. | ||
The Durov arrest shows that now even proprietors of social media companies, which used to be pretty much exclusively on board with the regime censorship agenda, now defectors in that realm. | ||
We'll face similar criminal prosecution, as I think a lot of people correctly interpret the Durov arrest as a trial balloon for Elon, who's already at odds with European authorities, and I would have to assume US authorities as well. | ||
So this is where the game is. | ||
It marks a major escalation, very dangerous. | ||
Instead of Deplatforming you instead of banning your account. | ||
They're now putting people in prison and it doesn't matter how rich you are. | ||
It doesn't matter if you own these companies. | ||
You are still subject to punishment if you don't cooperate with the corrupt regime. | ||
Darren, if people want to follow you, read the story on Revolver. | ||
Where can they go to do that? | ||
Revolver.news is white hot. | ||
It's right at the top. | ||
I'm on X at Darren J. Beatty. | ||
Check it out. | ||
Read it at revolver.news and share it. | ||
Darren, thank you so much for joining us. | ||
Thank you, Natalie. | ||
Of course, breaking news just before we were live on this show, that I guess Jim Jordan sent out subpoenas to the CEO of Authentic Campaigns, the firm that Lauren Marchand, daughter of Judge Juan Marchand, where she works, working for, oh wait, that's right, Kamala Harris, and like basically every Democrat in Congress, getting millions of dollars in both fundraising fees and donations, working for President Trump's opposition, spoken and unspoken. | ||
Now, to that I would humbly suggest you shouldn't wait until less than 70 days before an election, and I think it really shows you the priorities of this Congress. | ||
They had time to, of course, do the stupid performative bills like, you know, making sure we didn't ban gas stoves. | ||
Yeah, how's that playing out when we're in the late stage and decline of the United States? | ||
We're being invaded at the southern border by tens of millions of people who don't respect this culture, who want to exploit this country for everything we're worth. | ||
We're up against criminal lawfare regimes that are trying to destroy this country from the inside out, not just President Trump, Stephen K. Bannon, Peter Navarro, all the January 6th patriots. | ||
You guys wanted to wait until, what is it, 69, 68 days until the election to subpoena someone whose ties, not just to Juan Marchand, but to Kamala Harris, has been known for months? | ||
For months! | ||
You guys are just getting around to it now. | ||
But you know what you guys did have time to do? | ||
Give more money to Ukraine. | ||
Give more money to Israel. | ||
Give more money to basically every country except the United States and secure our southern border. | ||
I guess you guys did some messaging bills on border security. | ||
I had that pan out. | ||
The Biden regime is busy getting ready to reverse an immigration program that is known and flagged for fraud and abuse. | ||
People coming from countries like Venezuela, Cuba, Ukraine. | ||
Even the own Biden regime, even they admit it. | ||
NBC's coverage of it, in the headline they say it's a program racked with fraud. | ||
And you know if the mainstream media is admitting that a program facilitating immigration has problems, that it's ten, a hundred, probably a thousand times worse than they're actually letting on. | ||
But thanks, guys, for subpoenaing someone who, what is it, three, four months after this show has been banging the drum, you guys need to actually do something? | ||
You guys finally got around to doing it? | ||
Yeah, I'm kind of getting deja vu to the whole Biden impeachment inquiry, where this show and other independent journalists have been telling you for years this audience is smart enough to get it. | ||
You guys need to issue the subpoenas, drop the subpoenas, drop the freaking hammer, and it takes you guys. | ||
There's a lag time. | ||
Maybe you guys have to run your decisions through all the lobbyists and all the, you know, GOP establishment leadership. | ||
They're not on our side. | ||
They're on the side, maybe not as explicit as authentic campaigns. | ||
They're in your face about who their political affiliations are. | ||
Just look at their website. | ||
They're, of course, working with the Brennan Center too, the same group that's behind the lawsuit trying to get Trump off the ballot in Colorado. | ||
No conspiracies there. | ||
But yeah, let's just take a vacation for a month. | ||
It seems like a great time. | ||
This country's burning to the ground. | ||
Congress is too lazy to even, you know, play the fiddle while Rome burns. | ||
They're going to be on vacation. | ||
Nero works harder than our congressmen do. | ||
Someone who knows this firsthand is Mike Howell, of course, of Heritage Oversight. | ||
Now, Mike, before we get into interesting ballot challenges, you guys have done some interesting analysis on just the copious amount of federal funding that have been plowed into these investigations, the superseding indictments. | ||
There's so many indictments even to keep track of. | ||
But can you walk the audience through the federal funding that is behind this, and just in general, your thoughts on this subpoena, how long overdue it is? | ||
Yeah, so I'll remind folks that a couple months ago, the promises from Capitol Hill were that they would defund the prosecutions and lawfare into President Trump. | ||
And obviously, that did not happen, and they just continue to resurrect themselves. | ||
So, the special counsels, they issue these reports, they try to hide away on the Department of Justice websites, and they list out the expenditures. | ||
And lo and behold, we ducked through the numbers and Jack Smith's reckless and unconstitutional abuse is more than double the combined expenses of the special counsels looking into Hunter and Joe Biden. | ||
And think about that for a second. | ||
I mean, obviously it's out of control, but The simplest case should be the Jack Smith one. | ||
They're essentially looking into where the classified documents were that Trump, by the way, had complete authority to take with him because he declassified them. | ||
It's a simple case. | ||
Obviously, there is nothing there. | ||
Compare that to Joe and Hunter Biden. | ||
Their conduct and their use of classified materials spans decades. | ||
It spans continents. | ||
It spans known corrupt interests. | ||
So those should have been real and huge investigations. | ||
And people, you know, wanted to celebrate when special counsel Hur told them what they | ||
already knew, that Joe Biden was senile. | ||
And they took that as a victory. | ||
But it was a failure because Hur refused to look at anything beyond where Joe took those | ||
He should have been looking at how he was trading on them for his corrupt interests. | ||
He basically just did a a catalog of, hey look, I went in his garage, I found a document here, look at this picture of a car, I'm done here, nothing to see. | ||
And of course Congress applauded like they won the Super Bowl. | ||
And so those numbers on the left side, you know, of the screen, they should have shown Her and Weiss with numbers through the roof looking into the corrupt conduct. | ||
And instead, it's Jack Smith, fully funded by this Republican Congress, going absolutely reckless, engaging in lawfare. | ||
And for every dollar Jack Smith spends prosecuting Donald J. Trump, he probably takes 20 more dollars off the board having to defend it. | ||
That's what this is about. | ||
It's election interference. | ||
Oh, Democrats are laughing at us. | ||
Not at us, they're fearful of this audience, but of House Republican leadership. | ||
They're absolute jokes, and they think that a letter from Mark Zuckerberg. | ||
Yeah, sorry I rigged the 2020 election. | ||
Sorry I censored all of your constituents. | ||
Here's a weak-worded letter. | ||
Or I can't even go out of my way to cite the so-called analysis that I found that says that all the grants, the nearly billion dollars that I gave out, didn't just go to Democrats. | ||
Because you guys are probably too stupid to read that. | ||
Yeah. | ||
Thanks, Mark Zuckerberg. | ||
I think we're going to need a little more. | ||
That could be the opening bid for us to accept your apology. | ||
You're going to need to go a lot further than that. | ||
But speaking of Democrats who are actually willing to engage in lawfare and, frankly, political war, in some ways I think it's almost kinetic warfare. | ||
It's not just information warfare. | ||
They're working to make sure that RFK can potentially still be on the ballot to try to, you know, pull some votes from Trump. | ||
But you guys made an interesting point that the DNC still technically has two candidates running. | ||
The way they've done this process, it's sort of maybe extra legal is the way I'd put it. | ||
But can you walk the audience through that sort of critique and just what's going on on the ballot warfare front? | ||
Yeah, there's basically a war going on right now and only one side's fighting to win it. | ||
You have the left trying to prevent RFK from getting off the ballots. | ||
You have them suing to make sure Cornel West and Jill Stein can't get on the ballots. | ||
And then you have the right who's looking at this, you know, novel situation in which In the dying days of Biden's campaign, they were freaking out. | ||
They basically started referring to him formally and officially as the nominee before the convention ever happened. | ||
The DNC put it in writing. | ||
They put it in fundraising emails. | ||
Biden called himself the nominee. | ||
So no need for a convention. | ||
He's the nom. | ||
They did that as their last gasp effort to stave off the goo. | ||
So you have one nominee there. | ||
Then he resigns via Instagram from the campaign and, you know, Harris is anointed and they move up the nomination process to a virtual Zoom call in the dead of night just so they can get ahead of any deadlines. | ||
What they didn't think about is the fact they didn't properly substitute and take Joe Biden off. | ||
So where they're at right now is they have two nominees for president. | ||
I don't know why Secretaries of State aren't asking the question to the DNC. | ||
Hey, we have rules for this. | ||
If you want to take a nom off, you've got to follow these different processes. | ||
The delegates have to be released by certain processes. | ||
Did you check those boxes? | ||
Where's the paperwork? | ||
And they're not doing that, and I think they absolutely should. | ||
Because you cannot have this situation be blessed, where we're basically saying this is a democratic process. | ||
And I'll tell you who I agree with here. | ||
Mike, I'm going to hold you there because we've got to jump to break. | ||
I always love being told when I'm right, but I'm going to make the audience wait a few minutes. | ||
Before hearing that, Warren Posse, in the meantime, you can go to mypatriotsupply.com. | ||
You can actually save $200 on their three-month emergency food kit. | ||
How about that? | ||
You may need it with this House Republican leadership we got. | ||
We'll be right back after this short break. | ||
unidentified
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Banner. | |
Welcome back to The War, and we're still joined by Mike Howell of Heritage Oversight. | ||
Mike, if you want to pick up where you left off, I'm sure the audience would love it. | ||
Yeah, so the Democrats have two nominees for president right now because they didn't properly switch them out. | ||
Biden was prematurely declared the nominee by the DNC and Jamie Harrison in writing, and then they moved up a Zoom convention to have Harris. | ||
And so there's two, and I don't know why states aren't asking. | ||
Which one are you going with and making them go through the proper processes? | ||
From looking at it, there could be instances in which both of them should be on the ballot or Harris has to be running as a write-in. | ||
And there's deadlines at play and it's an absolute mess. | ||
You see what's happening with RFK and Cornel West and you have to wonder why the left is being allowed to skate by and make it up as they go yet again. | ||
Mike Howell, if people want to follow you guys, well, I'll have to have you back on to go through the Biden bucks. | ||
That's the reason why Mark Zuckerberg feels confident not putting all this money into the 2024 election, because Joe Biden's picking up the check. | ||
We'll have you back on to talk about that. | ||
But in the meantime, if people want to follow you, follow Heritage Oversight. | ||
Where can they go to do all that? | ||
Follow us at OversightProject at OversightPR. | ||
I'm at nhowtweets. | ||
And real quick on Zuck, you want to know how the House Republicans aren't really mad at them and they're just playing patty cake? | ||
Because their lobbyists are still crawling all over their Capitol Hill offices, and I know that for a fact. | ||
They're killing bills left and right. | ||
They're still holding hands. | ||
Of course, I'm sure they were probably in cahoots writing this letter to try to make it as least offensive as possible. | ||
The best part, right, in the paragraph where he talks about how he rigged, and I use that word intentionally, the 2020 election, he says, and I want to address this, you know, conspiracy theory that I rigged the election. | ||
Yeah, you wanted to address it. | ||
Well, dude, you waited a little long. | ||
You waited like four years to address it. | ||
You shouldn't have waited to be probed by congressional investigators before you admitted to your crimes. | ||
And again, I use that word intentionally, too. | ||
Mike, we'll have you back on to go through that and so much more. | ||
We've got to bounce to another guest. | ||
Thank you so much, though, for coming on. | ||
You know, birchgold.com slash Bannon, text Bannon to 989898. | ||
I think I'm right on that. | ||
Yes. | ||
We love Birchgold. | ||
We love Philip Patrick, who joins us now. | ||
Now, Philip Patrick, there was an article in The Atlantic. | ||
I want to read the headline because it's so preposterous. | ||
Sometimes you just have to ignore the economists. | ||
And it goes through making the case for why price controls actually work and are a good thing. | ||
Whether it's price controls, student loan bailouts, who knows what else, what other tricks they have up their sleeve. | ||
They're obviously trying to buy votes. | ||
How do you think this is going to impact the economy and why have gold and silver always been a hedge against it? | ||
Well, I mean, look, we don't have to listen to economists if they don't want to, but they can look at history. | ||
And the reality is that price controls do not work and they have never worked. | ||
And the reason that they don't is they simply distort the markets. | ||
All they do is disincentivize corporations and they lead to shortages, not to a greater availability. | ||
Of goods and services. | ||
And like I said, you can look back to every historical example where they've been used. | ||
Ask Nixon. | ||
Ask the USSR. | ||
They've never worked. | ||
They've just disincentivized corporations. | ||
And like I said, they've led to shortages and ultimately higher prices. | ||
So they don't work. | ||
And the reality is, she doesn't have an economic platform, right? | ||
There were essentially three pillars. | ||
One was price controls, which we've addressed. | ||
The second was to fight unaffordable housing by giving more money to people to buy houses. | ||
I mean, when will this administration understand that putting more money into people's hands, creating more competition for goods and services, will just drive prices up longer term? | ||
And of course, the third pillar was a tax credit of $6,000 for newborns and re-estating a $3,600 tax credit for existing children. | ||
You know, if the federal government had the money to pay for this, arguably it might be worth considering, certainly worth debating. | ||
But the reality is we don't have the money to do it. | ||
All we're going to do is print more money, amass more debt, drive the value of the dollar down and drive inflation up. | ||
So as you said, this is not an economic policy. | ||
This is a desperate attempt to buy votes with, you know, a few 68 days, as we saw until the election. | ||
That's all it is. | ||
We've been focusing a lot on this show, not obviously always, but, you know, government censorship. | ||
And I'm just curious, from your perspective, with the narratives that you guys talk about, you know, are you guys ever on sort of the receiving end of a lot of this pushback, you know, being dismissed as crazy conspiracy theorists, spreading misinformation, especially when you see the Fed, Janet Yellen, I think, always lying about the true state of the economy. | ||
Then, you know, six, nine months down the line, they then finally admit that we were right, or they revise the job numbers to the tune of nearly a million jobs. | ||
But what do you think it shows that they're trying to push back on a lot of these economic narratives that I think really reveal the true issue of the Harris-Biden presidency? | ||
Well, it's a good point. | ||
Look, we've been saying for a long time the economy is not in good shape. | ||
The American people are feeling it, but the numbers that have been rammed down our throats Have been different and you know this huge revisions down employment employment numbers being good example I think goes a long way to sort of explaining the disconnect between the White House and the American people. | ||
There's a big difference between looking at job reports on a government spreadsheet And sort of being out there making phone calls, pounding the pavement and trying to find the jobs. | ||
Now, was the BLS over reporting jobs deliberately? | ||
I don't think so. | ||
It's not as if anyone wasn't going to find this out. | ||
We've been talking about this for months on the war room. | ||
But what really worries me is, you know, Chairman Powell keeps telling us the Fed is data dependent, and that's fine. | ||
They should be. | ||
The downside is their decisions are only as good as their data, and their data is seriously flawed. | ||
Look, in the real world, we can understand that we can't lower grocery prices by fudging a spreadsheet, but what you can do is muddy the water, corrupt the data, and what that does is makes it harder and harder for businesses, state and local governments, and even people like Chairman Powell Getting kind of tired of always being on the right side of history, I don't know about you. | ||
months for saying this. | ||
The numbers are not as this administration is suggesting. | ||
And the reality is we're on the right side of history here and we keep seeing it. | ||
Getting kind of tired of always being on the right side of history. | ||
I don't know about you. | ||
Philip Patrick, if people want to check out Birch Gold, give you guys a call, get in contact with you guys, | ||
how can they do that? | ||
So, birchgold.com forward slash Bannon. | ||
Again, birchgold.com forward slash Bannon. | ||
That's going to get them access to a free information kit on why and how to buy precious metals either inside or outside of an IRA. | ||
It will also give them access to the end of the Dollar Empire series written by Steve, which will give a really good history on sort of how we ended up where we are today. | ||
And people can reach me directly on getter at Philip Patrick. | ||
Philip, thank you so much for joining us. | ||
Thanks, Natalie. | ||
Now when the Atlantic Magazine tells me to do something, I tend to do the opposite. | ||
I don't know about you guys, I don't really take anything that globalist rag says to heart. | ||
So when they tell me to ignore the economists, I think I'm going to have another economist on the show just to piss them off. | ||
I'm honored to bring on Dr. Alan Mendenhall, an associate dean and professor over at Troy University, also a Claremont Institute Lincoln Fellow, he was part of my class. | ||
You guys have some great data that you've put out from Troy, from sort of your anti-woke business center that you guys run. | ||
But before we get into that, I would just love to get your perspective on this sort of media cover-up operation that we're seeing unfold on price controls, on price gouging, on all these ridiculous policies that the Harris campaign is pushing. | ||
unidentified
|
Well, thank you for having me on, Natalie. | |
It's great to see you again. | ||
My understanding is that the Atlantic article argues that we should ignore economists who critique price gouging laws, and that advocates for federal regulation in the name of fairness are correct. | ||
Price gouging is actually a good thing. | ||
It exists to prevent shortages. | ||
This is basic supply and demand. | ||
Higher prices during shortages signal to suppliers that there's a high demand for a particular good. | ||
This happens all the time in Alabama, by the way. | ||
We have hurricane season here, and there are tornadoes that occur throughout the state. | ||
And when this happens, there's a run on gas and people are parked for blocks outside of gas stations trying to get gas. | ||
But the higher prices send a signal to increase production or to reallocate resources to alleviate the shortage. | ||
So this is just natural stuff. | ||
Nobody benefits if we run out of gas completely during a shortage when ambulances can't get to the hospital or the people who need to get to the hospital to deliver a baby or to get their sick | ||
grandmother to the hospital can't do that. | ||
When prices are allowed to rise, people are less likely to purchase more than they need. So let's | ||
say your tank is 95% full and you hear that you're going to have some bad weather and you decide, | ||
well, I'm just going to go to the gas station to fill up that extra 5% | ||
Well, what if everybody's doing that? | ||
And then the gas stations start running out of gas and then people can't get gasoline in their cars. | ||
This will cause the good to be depleted. | ||
Price gouging actually allocates scarce resources to those who need them the most, as opposed to those who value the resources less. | ||
So it serves an essential function, and in the long term, it ensures that prices actually go back down. | ||
If a good or resource remains scarce, the price is going to remain high. | ||
This is basic supply and demand. | ||
But high costs will actually Well, look, there's a high demand for this particular product. | ||
We need to get in on the game. | ||
We need to get in there. | ||
And that type of competition will drive prices back down. | ||
So setting price controls, bad idea. | ||
Strangely for Kamala Harris, she's made this central to her economic platform, and it just flies in the face of basic economic principles. | ||
Well, and speaking of flying the face to economic principles, we're seeing all these corporations go woke. | ||
I always say woke is too euphemistic a term, but I've yet to find a better one, so until then we'll use it as a place filler. | ||
But you guys have new data coming out, and the numbers are staggering. | ||
What is it, 80% of Americans don't want corporations to basically tow the, you know, far left political line to get political? | ||
Can you walk the audience through, I mean, that number is massive, that is insane, especially when you think about how that translates politically, but can you walk the audience through the new study that you guys have out, the new data and figures? | ||
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
This is a report that the Manuel H. Johnson Center did with 1792 Exchange, and it finds that 80% of Americans believe corporations have become too political in the last five years. | ||
62% want CEOs to run businesses and not take stand on politically sensitive topics. | ||
61% prefer small and local to big business. | ||
73% of respondents feel comfortable talking about current events in the workplace, but that figure drops to 42% if those current events involve politics. | ||
People are afraid to talk about politics in the office. | ||
Over half of respondents felt pressure at work to be politically correct. | ||
And more than a third have seen co-workers receive poor treatment for not being politically correct. | ||
I think there are numerous factors that explain these conditions in the workplace. | ||
Most notably, ESG or the Environmental, Social and Governance movement that emanates from the financial services and investment space. | ||
And can you walk us through a little bit? | ||
You guys focus so much on ESG and how that is plaguing this country, destroying it from the inside out. | ||
Just your kind of assessment where we stand on that fight? | ||
unidentified
|
Yeah, sure. | |
Well, big picture, ESG is an acronym that refers to Environmental, Social, and Governance. | ||
It refers to the To the non-financial standards and factors that asset management firms, banks, financial institutions account for when they allocate capital or assess risk. | ||
So when we're looking at the E, we're looking at environmental factors like biodiversity or pollution, all the water management issues. | ||
The social would be DEI, LGBTQ plus issues, where a company stands on abortion, for example, whether it will pay to send an employee out of state to get an abortion, | ||
these types of matters. | ||
And the G refers to transparency, board diversity, executive compensation, but also, and principally, | ||
to the shift from the shareholder to the stakeholder model of governance. | ||
I think ESG is very nefarious, not because it is some big, grand conspiracy. | ||
If it were a Goliath, all we would need is a slingshot and a pebble to knock it down. | ||
But instead... And Alan, we've got to jump to break, so I'm going to hold you through to conclude. | ||
Your thoughts are great peace in the American mind. | ||
mind warm possible that the doctor and then all just after this | ||
unidentified
|
here's your home Welcome back to The War Room. | |
We've got a few minutes left with Dr. Alan J. Mendenhall. | ||
Alan, if you just want to wrap up what you were saying and kind of give a little plug for the piece that you have up in the American Mind so people can go read it, but just on the crusade against ESG, where we are and all that. | ||
unidentified
|
Well, sure. | |
Just briefly, if ESG were a single target, it'd be easy to hit. | ||
But there are $100 trillion of assets under management globally, predicted to be $150 billion by 2025. | ||
This can't be from private money, we know, because there are only 813 billionaires in the United States, according to Forbes, only about 2,700 in the world. | ||
So this is government money being invested. | ||
Pension money, state and federal pension money, sovereign wealth funds from oil-rich nations. | ||
municipal bonds, other forms of government bonds, and it's a loop where asset management | ||
firms are investing government money on the front end, then buying publicly traded companies | ||
on the back end that are most likely to get government subsidies. | ||
So this is a giant sort of taxpayer extraction business model. | ||
And what these companies do is when they buy shares of publicly traded companies, they | ||
push them into the woke direction. | ||
Now, in light of the pushback against ESG, this is slowing down quite a bit. | ||
My piece in The American Mind argues that this isn't just a financial phenomenon, but a psychological phenomenon, and that it is a force that shapes behaviors and norms within the economic sphere. | ||
Financial institutions become arbiters of social and political acceptability. | ||
They wield the ability to grant or deny access to capital, but for example, when banks close the accounts | ||
of conservatives or gun manufacturers or individuals deemed politically undesirable, what they're | ||
doing isn't just a denial of service, it's a performative act that demarcates the | ||
boundaries of acceptable economic citizenship. | ||
So everybody sees this happening and internalizes the norms that are being established by financial | ||
It's a power that's not merely prohibitive, but generating. | ||
It creates new categories of financial deviance, and it shapes the conduct of everybody who has to navigate this new normative landscape to maintain their economic viability. | ||
So, this phenomenon of ESG, as I say, is not just about institutions, regulations, bureaucracies, scientific statements, and philosophical propositions, and so on. | ||
It's also about the psychological internalization of these norms that happen through this system. | ||
And that, to me, is terrifying. | ||
Alan, if people want to follow you, stay up to date with everything you're working on, where can they go to do that? | ||
unidentified
|
Well, my website is just www.AlanMendenhall.com. | |
My Twitter handle is AlanMendenhall.com. | ||
These are probably the simplest ways. | ||
Alan, thank you so much. | ||
We'll have you back on soon. | ||
unidentified
|
Thank you, Natalie. | |
Of course. | ||
You guys know here in the War Room we pride ourselves on being signal not noise and always staying ahead of the curve. | ||
Just saying, saw a lot of other conservative news outlets picking up the take that we had on the Zuckerberg letter in their editorial board opinion pieces today. | ||
They didn't credit us, but we know they're watching the War Room. | ||
Like I said, we're ahead of the curve. | ||
So another predictive programming note on behalf of the global elite that I'd like to lay down comes in the realm of, of course, public health and pandemics, the interesting convergence between the two. | ||
Time magazine putting out a blockbuster piece yesterday saying that, catch this, the new pandemic, new weapons of biological destruction. | ||
Those are some scary words, pathogens, bioweapons. | ||
Now it's going to be caused by artificial intelligence. | ||
That's right. | ||
They're saying researchers warn that pandemics could be caused by AI now. | ||
So now we won't even be able to blame the Wuhan Institute of Virology or the Chinese Communist Party or Anthony Fauci or any of these crazy science obsessed overlords, sociopathic overlords, I might add. | ||
When the next pandemic breaks out, because apparently now it's going to be AI's fault just in time for the 2024 election, I'm sure. | ||
I guess the monkeypox narrative, I guess the bird flu pandemic, I guess that didn't quite hold. | ||
Shout out to you guys, the Warren Posse, for holding the line and not budging on that obvious PSYOP, almost as obvious as the Zuckerberg letter, almost as obvious Is that clip that we opened the show with of Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson being all Karen-esque when she tries to warn you guys from not wanting to certify election results. | ||
My question, whether it's Jocelyn Benson or the people out in Georgia who have such an issue, take such umbrage with the fact that we want to extend the certification process. | ||
And actually look through and check signatures and check the valid chain of custody on these ballots. | ||
What do you guys have to hide? | ||
Otherwise, Sunland is the best disinfectant. | ||
I thought you guys were the one who wanted to foster trust and build support for democracy, right? | ||
Well, I think more time to make sure all these ballots are cast legally and lawfully, that they're actually ballots and votes, not just ballots. | ||
There's an important distinction there. | ||
I see you guys should invite the time. | ||
So what are you guys so scared of? | ||
Oh wait, I think our next guest might know a little something about that. | ||
Mike Lindell, you join us now. | ||
Mike, I know you always have deals for the posse, and you're always in and out of legal phone calls, but let the posse know what you've got cooking over at MyPillow. | ||
Yeah, it was my second day of a deposition with a company that rhymes with Smartmatic. | ||
So it's been a fun couple of days for me, everybody. | ||
Remember, everybody, go to LyndellPlan.com. | ||
Check out how we're securing our elections. | ||
That's one thing you can do. | ||
But in the meantime, we're having this Labor Day special exclusive for the War Room Posse. | ||
These are our beds. | ||
The best beds ever made. | ||
The best mattresses ever made. | ||
I helped design them. | ||
Everything in there helps you get great sleep. | ||
They're 50% off, plus up to 50%, plus $100 off for each one for the War Room Posse. | ||
So as low as $449, they come in a box. | ||
They're warrantied for 10 years and you got, I believe, three or four months to return them for any reason whatsoever. | ||
You're going to love them. | ||
It's going to help your body get the best sleep of its life. | ||
And also we're doing our other Made in the USA product, or one of our other ones, And that's the one we're going to keep through Labor Day, too. | ||
And that is the Queen Size Premium Pillow, where it all started. | ||
$19.98, the lowest price in history. | ||
Use that promo code WARROOM. | ||
We're going to run it through Labor Day, everyone. | ||
It's going to be an amazing week here. | ||
Call MyPillow, 800-873-1062. | ||
If you go to the website or do the call-in, I'm also going to throw in for the War Room Posse an exclusive offer. | ||
You get a free MyPillow 2.0 multi-use pillow with any purchase. | ||
You see that square there with the mattresses? | ||
Check out all our mattresses. | ||
100% made in the USA. | ||
All our $25 extravaganzas are still up there for the weekend. | ||
And then you have that Overstock exclusive special for the War Room Posse. | ||
That's all of our sleepwear and clothing. | ||
Check that out. | ||
Up to 80% off. | ||
Promo code War Room. | ||
I love it. | ||
Mike Lindell, thank you so much. | ||
unidentified
|
Win, win, win, win, win, win, win, win. | |
I could just keep saying win until the end of the show, because there's so many wins. | ||
The win that's most important, though, is November 2024 election. | ||
Make sure you guys are phone banking, knocking on doors, doing whatever you do. | ||
And just a fun fact. | ||
Dominion. | ||
Yes, that voting company. | ||
You know who does all their cyber cloud work? | ||
Huawei, the Chinese Communist Party foreign asset company that's linked to their military. | ||
We'll get into that next show. |