Nov. 30, 2024 - Bannon's War Room
48:57
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
Donald Trump and the cynics want us to believe that he is all-powerful and that if you fight back, you will lose. | |
| He wants you to believe that if you fight back, you may face danger. | ||
| And he wants you to believe that if you fight back, it won't matter because he is in control of everything. | ||
| And it is not true. | ||
| It is time for us to build not a resistance, but an opposition, something that is durable, something that will last for four years and beyond. | ||
| And we need to build that opposition now, and we need to all gird ourselves for the long run. | ||
| This is the primal scream of a dying regime. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Pray for our enemies, because we're going medieval on these people. | |
| I got a free shot. | ||
| All these networks lying about the people. | ||
| The people had a belly full of it. | ||
| I know you don't like hearing that. | ||
| I know you try to do everything in the world to stop that, but you're not going to stop it. | ||
| It's going to happen. | ||
| And where do people like that go to share the big line? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Mega 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. Vance. | ||
| You're back in the War Room, where it's 30 November in the year of our Lord, 2024. | ||
| And a happy Saturday to all of you. | ||
| I know the Saturday shows are always Steve's favorites. | ||
| So by extension, they are mine, too. | ||
| And all that I have to say to Mark Elias, of course, of fame, of infamy here on the War Room, I guess in the words of Corey Lewandowski, womp, womp, no one cares about your democracy, drivel, BS, talking points, The American people rejected you guys in full force in early November. | ||
| And despite your best efforts to become what you so allegedly despise, right? | ||
| Election deniers. | ||
| Oh, you hate election denial so much, Mark Elias. | ||
| Well, what were you trying to do in Pennsylvania? | ||
| Yeah, maybe when we, I don't know, audit and investigate the 2020 election, we'll throw in your, and I'll use the word President Trump does, skullduggery of what you did out in the great state of Pennsylvania to try to overturn that Senate race, but to no avail, because this audience and this show is on to you. | ||
| But we're also on to you in all the ways that you're trying to subvert the MAGA agenda. | ||
| Like, you frankly always have. | ||
| You've been doing that for years now with a bunch of dark money donors and groups. | ||
| You know, Mark Elias, for someone who sits up there and says democracy almost every other word, and then throw in Project 2025 every other other word... | ||
| You're not very transparent about your donors. | ||
| It's not very democratic of you. | ||
| I thought you would love transparency. | ||
| Yeah, but maybe you don't want to show that because I don't know. | ||
| I think maybe, frankly, all roads probably lead overseas, but all roads lead to, I guess, the distinction between overseas and what's going on here isn't all that great when you see the color revolution playbook that they've weaponized overseas across Eastern European countries galore, bringing that home here. | ||
| Mark Elias, of course, co-chairing Democracy 2025, the sort of legal apparatchik, hatchet group. | ||
| That's, what, getting ready to disseminate over 800 lawyers, millions of dollars to come after the Trump agenda in partnership with none other than Norm Eisen and a bunch of people who also participated in those Transition Integrity Project exercises are now all of a sudden back and helping, I don't know, state AGs out in Arizona draft cases against Trump supporters and President Donald J. Trump himself, right? | ||
| The same agey who, what, Chris Mays had never tried a case before. | ||
| It almost makes you think the reason why they want to fill our government with idiots, and shall I use a word, listless vessels, people like Joe Biden, like Chris Mays, people who have no experience and aren't just morally bankrupt, but intellectually bankrupt, so they can but intellectually bankrupt, so they can use them as puppets, right? | ||
| Joe Biden is the archetype, the ultimate unelected bureaucrat, because he lost in 2020, and that entire White House is filled with unelected bureaucrats, who I look forward to being mass-fired, if not mass-schedule-F'd, on January 20th. | ||
| How about this? | ||
| Schedule-F around and find... | ||
|
unidentified
|
Out. | |
| I am honored to be joined by someone who knows a lot about all those, shall we say, media matters buzzwords that I'm sure will get me clip that is none other than I think the person who sort of pushed the whole color revolution narrative into the kind of forefront, the media lexicon, at least here on War Room. | ||
| And that is Dr. Darren J. Beatty, a Biden regime alum. | ||
| I'm so sorry for your loss. | ||
| But Darren, I just wanted to sort of get your thoughts before we get into sort of the path forward, the fun stuff on January 6th, the pipe bomb, all that stuff. | ||
| Your thoughts on sort of where the resistance stands now and what you think it's going to look like this time around. | ||
| You know, that's a really interesting question, and I think it might be premature to say. | ||
| I think the dynamic is very different from what it was in the aftermath of 2016, in the specific sense that I think the left is largely demoralized. | ||
| I think there's an enormous effect of Trump winning the popular vote. | ||
| This decisive mandate. | ||
| the left losing Latino men. | ||
| It really doesn't leave any readily available excuse to them of, oh, he was too racist or, oh, you know, the Russians stepped in and just marginally got him over the line. | ||
| They're really kind of, for once, really forced to confront how profoundly unpopular they are and how unpopular their message is and what they represent is. | ||
| And so I think they're still in this regrouping stage to figure out what's going on. | ||
| And, of course, they're all blaming each other, and we've seen glorious representations of that on MSNBC and so forth. | ||
| If anything, and this ties into some of the other things you've been talking about and that we might talk about, I think the resistance Might actually migrate over to, intensify in, and express itself through Other countries, UK, you see the intensification with Starmer and his role. | ||
| You see Australia making similar gestures. | ||
| One could imagine even the EU as a whole, in light of Trump's victory, will kind of double down on this oppositional identity to the United States. | ||
| Kind of like how they did with George W. Bush when in Europe you had Jacques Chirac and Schroeder and these other guys. | ||
| In similar fashion, but for very different reasons, then you could argue the Europeans were the good guys. | ||
| Here they're unquestionably the bad guys and they would be promoting the censorship regime and a lot of the poisonous stuff that maybe reached its apex around 2020 remain pernicious throughout and seems to be on a bit of a retreat even at the domestic level in the United States. | ||
| So I kind of predict at this point, although, as I said, premature, that the resistance could actually migrate to and intensify in and express itself through foreign entities, not the Russia, | ||
| Russia, not the China, China, but actually in the rest of the Anglosphere and in the EU. This is something that we've definitely been covering on War Room, since they don't control the levers of power here at home to carry out the mass censorship. | ||
| Like we said, like they always do, they're going to have to outsource it. | ||
| And to that point, too, maybe it won't be government funding, but it's always been this sort of weird merger, right, where they sort of outsource it to the NGOs, the dark money, the whole kind of apparatus. | ||
| I'm curious, though, your thoughts... | ||
| On how the sort of Norm Eisen's and more particularly that color revolution playbook, if you think that they will try to carry that out again, I know it's premature, but when you see this sort of pivot, they're now attacking Trump as an autocrat. | ||
| You got Norm Eisen really, I think, vindicating that piece that you guys wrote all the way back in the Transition Integrity Project days, quite literally tweeting out his democracy playbook from Brookings and saying, Yeah, Trump may have won, but here are all the ways that we can hold him accountable. | ||
| How do you think that sort of sect of, you know, resistance 2.0 interplays with the foreign element? | ||
| Yeah, that's an interesting question. | ||
| Of course, these people haven't gone away. | ||
| Norm Eisen in particular has been, I have to admire his persistence and energy. | ||
| He has not stopped. | ||
| He is relentless in working towards his objective. | ||
| So I think I think these people will remain players, but the overall picture as compared to 2020 or 2016, I think they're very weakened. | ||
| And the idea of launching a kind of color revolution scenario, the two major dimensions of that are lawfare And mass demonstrations. | ||
| And you really need some degree of popular buy-in and legitimacy in order to do that. | ||
| And I think they've really sustained major losses in the media, for one, because Elon took over Twitter and that was a major vehicle for their operation. | ||
| So I think that's severely curtailed their ability to achieve narrative control and also to engineer these mobilizations. | ||
| And also on the lawfare front, We see a significant retreat. | ||
| You see what's happening with Jack Smith and others, and almost a kind of public discrediting of the avalanche of false and politically motivated cases that were levied against Trump and his supporters. | ||
| So, of course, these people will still be around, perhaps once they regroup and maybe things will change as we get closer to the midterms. | ||
| If they don't go our way in the midterms, they might use that opportunity to pounce. | ||
| But I think right now they're really licking their wounds and they haven't been weaker in a very, very long time. | ||
| And insofar as one sees any real expression of energy, it's actually come through the foreign dimension. | ||
| In this case, in the UK, Australia, perhaps a little bit in Germany. | ||
| And that could be where this force develops and sort of hibernates for the time being. | ||
|
unidentified
|
you. | |
| I noticed you didn't mention Haiti when you were rattling off those countries. | ||
| Darren, I feel like we also have to just take a quick moment to appreciate your new set, your new backdrop. | ||
| I'm sure the audience is very, very excited about that as are We in the war room, we love the audio quality. | ||
| The shot looks great. | ||
| Give me a few minutes before we jump to break, though, on a happier note, where you think kind of Team Trump, the DOJ, whatever department you think it needs to be, on Jan 6 stuff, on the pipe bomb stuff, what that sort of battle plan looks like. | ||
| Well, that's a very important question. | ||
| And again, it's premature to say, I've said in other interviews that basically the pipe bomb investigation, January 6th story, we're at the very end stages. | ||
| We know it was a scam. | ||
| We know it was one of the biggest scandals in the nation's recent history. | ||
| I have a precise, exact itemized list of exactly what the future head of the FBI, what future Attorney General would need to do. | ||
| It's simply a question of how interested and how cooperative Those office holders will be. | ||
| With Matt Gaetz, I would have been entirely confident that we would get to the bottom of it. | ||
| For now, I'm optimistic, but can't give any guarantees. | ||
| It depends, but I can literally hand this on a silver platter. | ||
| We're so close. | ||
| The FBI just got caught in a lie. | ||
| They lied about the telecom data. | ||
| They said it was corrupted. | ||
| They have the telecom data. | ||
| They have all the data they need to identify the pipe bomber. | ||
| It's sitting in their offices. | ||
| There are two cover-up individuals in the FBI. Their identities are sitting in the offices. | ||
| I know one of the identities, but it's not time to say it yet. | ||
| They're all in there. | ||
| All we need now is a cooperative and courageous head of the DOJ and head of the FBI to take us to that last step and expose the biggest scandal in recent American history. | ||
| Darren, if you can hang with us through the break, there's so many more stories I want to get into. | ||
| I know you won't expose that one person, but I think maybe after the break, maybe Jessica Brandt we can do a little exposure on up at D&I. Darren, hang with us through the break. | ||
| And Warren Posse, in the meantime, you've got to make sure you're checking out birchgold.com slash Bannon, giving Philip Patrick a call. | ||
| You know, all these people who are lying to you about, what, everything? | ||
| They're, of course, lying to you about the economy and all that stuff, too. | ||
| Gold has always been a hedge. | ||
| Check out Patriot Mobile, too. | ||
| You know, Glenn's story and the team over there. | ||
| They love this show. | ||
| Glenn's always at all of our events. | ||
| Show him some love. | ||
| That's PatriotMobile.com slash Bannon. | ||
| Promo code Bannon. | ||
| Bunch of great holiday deals. | ||
| We got Darren Beattie and a host of wonderful guests coming at you this Saturday morning. | ||
| morning. | ||
| We will be right back. | ||
| You're back in the war room where we are still joined by Dr. Darren J. Beattie. | ||
| Darren, I would love for you to explain to the audience a little bit about Jessica Brandt, someone who uses the words disinformation way too much. | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| And again, this is an extension of, if not the Marvel Universe, the Color Revolution Universe. | ||
| You know, the whole story of this Color Revolution segment are these Atlanticists, these people obsessed with Russia. | ||
| The whole censorship predicate disinformation comes out of this... | ||
| Intelligence world dimension that's oriented toward Russia and a whole cottage industry of people who are using this term as a censorship pretext, created NGOs, created really an entire industry based on censoring American speech under the guise of some dubious foreign policy agenda with respect to Russia. | ||
| For those familiar with that general context, this Jessica Brandt will not be an exception, unfortunately. | ||
| She currently runs what is called the Foreign Malign Influence Center under the DNI, the Director of National Intelligence, which will soon, we hope, be run by Tulsi Gabbard. | ||
| Now, this foreign influence group basically replicates the function of other infamous organizations like the Global Engagement Center, which we've reported on extensively. | ||
| The great Mike Benz has talked about it. | ||
| You've talked about it. | ||
| And it replicates this, but it houses it within the DNI. And I did a little digging into this Jessica Brandt, and it's, as I said, exactly what you'd expect. | ||
| She has done reports at the Brookings Institution that involve attacking Tucker Carlson, Charlie Kirk, and Dan Bongino, among others, for what? | ||
| For daring to suggest that Russia itself did not blow up Nord Stream 2. That's how dumb it is. | ||
| For Derrick to suggest that Russia didn't blow up a critical piece of its own infrastructure, they're disinformation agents of the Kremlin. | ||
| This is the tier of individual that's now running the whole foreign influence office at the DNI. | ||
| Some other examples, again, repeated pattern, attacking Tucker Carlson, attacking Charlie Kirk, obsession with Russia and linking Russia's interests to legitimate free speech actions of American citizens who dared to adopt a heterodox obsession with Russia and linking Russia's interests to legitimate free speech actions of American citizens who dared to You see this repeated pattern. | ||
| But what's interesting is she bills herself as this like AI expert or emerging AI technologies things. | ||
| She has no history of involvement with AI or really technology. | ||
| And the funny thing is, if you trace her reports, they're all this misinformation slop dating back to like 2020. But then before 2020, there's nothing about technology whatsoever. | ||
| It's all about chastising Trump for the so-called travel ban. | ||
| So her obsession was promoting immigration in the United States, chastising Trump for the travel ban, and of course, a sprinkling of anti-Brexit stuff. | ||
| Oh, Brexit's horrible. | ||
| And then all of a sudden in 2020 when the disinformation, this is the apogee of the disinformation scam, when that was real hot, guess what? | ||
| She branded as, I'm an AI researcher. | ||
| I'm an expert in AI. And by that I mean censoring stuff that I don't like. | ||
| I'm an expert now. | ||
| Isn't that nice? | ||
| So she goes to all these conferences and overnight she becomes an AI expert. | ||
| I don't even know if she knows how to boot up a computer and she's an AI expert. | ||
| And what that means in practice is again, all of these poorly written, poorly thought out, truly slop-tier reports That effectively say, uh-oh, Tucker Carlson says stuff we don't like. | ||
| Therefore, he's Russian. | ||
| Therefore, we should censor him and any platform that hosts him. | ||
| And this is the type of person, in fact, in this case, the specific person who's running the Foreign Malign Influence Center under the DNI, which formally sits on top of the entire intelligence community. | ||
| It's wild to me that Brookings still retains its tax-exempt status. | ||
| I think that's something we should go after, too. | ||
| Just putting that as a little aside. | ||
| But linking that to kind of what you're saying, you're talking about these patterns, not just recognizing them here domestically. | ||
| But internationally, too, right? | ||
| There's sort of this outsourcing of just narrative building with the idea that American alternative media, you know, people like Charlie Kirk, Joe Rogan, they need to be censored, right? | ||
| They are a public health threat. | ||
| There are disinformation threats because apparently if you say, you know, in 30s, you know, they're not censored. | ||
| Flood responses in North Carolina, if they're not doing a good job, that's apparently spreading disinformation. | ||
| Or how about this? | ||
| Maybe they're actually just, I don't know, doing a bad job. | ||
| But the Australian Broadcasting Corporation boss went on sort of a, shall we call it a Jim VandeHei-tier, unhinged speech about the media going after Joe Rogan, disinformation more broadly. | ||
| Your thoughts on what that sort of signals? | ||
| I mean, what a decline of the Australian population. | ||
| Or maybe the Australians just deserve better. | ||
| You know, when I think of Australians, I think of those Foster's beer commercials. | ||
| And this is a huge step down from that. | ||
| Here you have nominally the head of the entire Australian government media, what's equivalent to what used to be called in the United States, the Broadcasting Board of Governors, our sort of propaganda arm to not, you know, they call it global public affairs now. | ||
| But here you have this guy who is asked about Joe Rogan and goes on to this extended rant saying how it's so horrific that Americans are entertained by this guy and, you know, just really amazing stuff coming from someone who represents the media in Australia. just really amazing stuff coming from someone who represents the | ||
| And again, I think this is a great example of this general dynamic, which I think is a critical, maybe the most important dynamic going on now, is that this oppositional identity, including this kind of orientation towards censorship, the whole apparatus that was built, is now kind of licking its wounds domestically in the United States. | ||
| Because of Trump, because of Elon, and so forth. | ||
| But it's almost redoubling its intensity and its commitment in other areas of the Anglosphere. | ||
| And it seems like this is where it's hibernating, but not in a dormant state, in a very active state, just not so much what we saw domestically here. | ||
| And so I think these are real There's indications that this could be a major issue going forward and develop further in this troubling direction. | ||
| Darren, if people want to stay up to date with everything you're working on, all the wonderfully hot takes at Revolver, where can they go to do all that? | ||
| Revolver.News, Revolver.News, if you like us, support us, join the fight. | ||
| We have a Black Friday deal on subscriptions and we have a brand new, crisp, totally high energy trailer that you're going to love. | ||
| Go to Revolver.News. | ||
| You will not regret it. | ||
| You will stay informed and you will stay on the cutting edge. | ||
| Between the new set and the new trailer, are you taking deep state cash? | ||
| Is Norm Eisen paying you? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I can't say that at all. | |
| I was joking. | ||
| I'm going to go pro Mike Rogers or whoever it is who's the real bad guy. | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| No deep state cash here. | ||
| That's good. | ||
| The only cash we want is Cash Patel, right? | ||
| How about that? | ||
| Darren, thank you so much for joining us. | ||
| We will see you soon, I am sure. | ||
| War Room Posse, we got a PAC show coming up for you. | ||
| I think we're going to be joined by FTC Commissioner, maybe FTC Chair, Andrew Ferguson, Dr. Naomi Wolf, kind of springboarding off of everything that we've just gone over with Darren. | ||
| The idea that because they lost here so overwhelmingly, they have to do what they always do. | ||
| Which is outsource, not the manufacturing this time, but I guess it's the manufacturing of their fake and BS narratives. | ||
| The idea that what, I don't know, the strapline of this show, the idea that COVID originated in a lab, that the COVID vaccines don't work, that are dangerous, that, I don't know, populist economics prevail over this weird neoliberal order that melts down if, I don't know, you want to institute tariffs, that all that is disinformation. | ||
| So what do they have to do? | ||
| Well, I guess because they lost and they can't use CISA or DHS or any of, you know, pick your poison, now they're going to use weird money, dark money sources coming from, you know, take your pick. | ||
| I'm sure all roads will lead back, whether it's the George Soros type, Mark Zuckerberg, people who hate this country. | ||
| They're going to outsource it overseas, whether it's the Center for Countering Digital Hate, the Global Disinformation Index, right? | ||
| They already have this foreign apparatus set up, and we know they only deal in projection. | ||
| So when they say that we're the ones who are guilty of foreign collusion and foreign manipulation of algorithms and all that, no, no, no. | ||
| The only reason that you would even know what that is in the same way that Anthony Fauci would be an expert in the origins of COVID is because you're responsible for it because you do it yourself. | ||
| I think Anthony Fauci is not going to have that hot of 2025 or 2026, shall we say. | ||
| Dr. Naomi Wolf will be joining us to go through all of that and so much more. | ||
| But in the meantime, you've got to make sure you're checking out Sacred Human Health, Getting the Grass-Fed Beef Liver. | ||
| Although, I think if we're making America so healthy again, you're not even going to need it, though. | ||
| Make sure you go still and go and get it. | ||
| If we yank all the big pharma ads off of MSNBC, frankly, their profits are going to plummet even more. | ||
| I don't even want to know what those margins are, let alone if you take away their crutch that is Pfizer. | ||
| Though I'd love to see how their programming changes. | ||
| Though I don't know if it'll change that much. | ||
| I think COVID vaccines will probably make it a little hard to tell the truth. | ||
| Like I said, stay with us. | ||
| We still got a packed show on this Saturday morning coming for you. | ||
| Andrew Ferguson, Dr. Naomi Wolf. | ||
| Make sure you're checking out Sacred Human Health and Birch Gold. | ||
| We will be right back after this short break. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's hard for thee to kick against the bricks. | |
| War Room. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Mann. | ||
| You're back in the war room where I am honored to be joined by Andrew Ferguson, one of two Republican commissioners over at the Federal Trade Commission, which I think before we get into this interview, one of two Republican commissioners over at the Federal Trade Commission, which I think before we get into this interview, it's sort of a testament to how that we're talking to someone from the FTC who I know has done shows with Mike Benz. | ||
| He's Definitely on our side of the football, on fighting the good fight, really the, I think, existential fight, our ability to, I don't know, even air shows like War Room, despite their best efforts to pull us, yank us from YouTube and Spotify. | ||
| It's okay. | ||
| We're doing pretty well. | ||
| But Andrew has been sort of leading the charge over there on how to push back against these censorship efforts. | ||
| Andrew, we were just talking the last two blocks with Darren, how despite the Them losing in 2024, they're obviously not going to give up on their censorship efforts, right? | ||
| They're sort of allocating their loss. | ||
| Oh, it was a result of misinformation, disinformation, laying the pretext, in my opinion, to sort of crack down on dangerous disinformation, health, electoral or otherwise. | ||
| So I'm just curious your thoughts on, you know, how likely they'll be able to mount that offensive and more importantly, what either you and your FTC capacity or just more broadly, the Trump admin can do to fight back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, well, thanks for having me. | |
| So I think I divide the censorship problem into two buckets. | ||
| We've got one where we have purely private censorship, where I think there's two kinds. | ||
| You could have decisions being made by sort of the platforms themselves or potentially in tandem with each other, where the goal is to suppress disfavored speech. | ||
| The word we always hear is disinformation. | ||
| That's the classic way that this is said. | ||
| That's just Orwellian newspeak for ideas that Silicon Valley and progressives don't like. | ||
| The second version of the private one that I think is most interesting that Brendan Carr, the new chair of the FCC, has talked a lot about is the risk of potential advertising cartels. | ||
| Generally, under our antitrust laws, Private companies can sort of decide what they'd like to do with their own resources, but one of the most important things the antitrust laws forbid is people getting in a room and agreeing, we're not going to compete. | ||
| And if there are a bunch of powerful advertisers getting in a room together and saying, hey, let's all agree not to advertise on this platform because we don't like that they have free speech on that platform, or let's agree not to advertise about this podcast, | ||
| Or this online show, that can potentially violate the antitrust laws, because the antitrust laws are designed to make sure that all of us get to participate in markets freely and fairly, and that there isn't a bunch of backdoor dealing among competitors to suppress people or ideas. | ||
| And so, you know, at the FTC, that's one of the concerns that I really hope that the new Trump FTC is going to look into and that I've been calling for it to look into, which is if we've got agreements among the platforms to suppress ideas or speech. | ||
| We have to investigate those for potential antitrust violations. | ||
| And if we have advertiser cartels where advertisers are agreeing we're not going to advertise on this show, on this platform, those also potentially violate the antitrust laws. | ||
| Group boycotts are illegal under the antitrust laws, and I think they cry out for antitrust scrutiny. | ||
| And then I think we have a second censorship problem, and it's Super important that President Trump won this election because it's the kind of thing that he and his new government can address directly. | ||
| And we saw this during COVID especially, but where the platforms would collaborate, collude, however you want to call it, with government officials at the CDC, the Surgeon General's Office, the State Department, the FBI, and CISA. Where the government would call over to the platforms and say, hey, we don't like this thing being said about the vaccines. | ||
| We don't like this thing being said about COVID origins, labs and the like. | ||
| We don't like this sort of discussion about what happened in the 2020 presidential election. | ||
| We don't like people talking about the Hunter Biden laptop. | ||
| And the platforms would say, okay, got it. | ||
| We'll take it down. | ||
| No problem. | ||
| Some states sued the government. | ||
| Back in 2021 or 2022, it said, hey, the government is coercing the platforms to take down speech that they don't like. | ||
| And this wound its way up through the courts. | ||
| Louisiana, Missouri got big wins in the lower courts, big injunctions where courts were saying, You, the government, can't coerce these platforms to take down speech you don't like. | ||
| We have this little thing called the First Amendment, and the main thing the First Amendment does is protect the right of every American to speak his or her mind without the government interfering in that speech. | ||
| They interlept the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court, in a decision I don't fully agree with, said, well, we don't think there's enough evidence that the platforms were taking this down because they felt coerced by the government, or the government was threatening them, rather than the platforms being willing to do it. | ||
| But in my view, after this election, the distinction is less important because even if the First Amendment doesn't apply when the government picks up the phone and calls X or YouTube or Instagram or whatever and says, I need you to take this thing down, the government can forbid its own officials from doing that. | ||
| You know, President Trump and his new cabinet that he's been rolling out over the last several days, they can just order their subordinates, stop doing this. | ||
| Get off the phone with these platforms. | ||
| Stop suppressing the free speech of Americans. | ||
| Quit doing this. | ||
| And we don't even need the courts to intervene. | ||
| This can be done directly by the government. | ||
| Congress can also pass laws that forbid this sort of thing. | ||
| And I think that that would be a great idea. | ||
| But that is one of the most important results of this election, is the problem that the states uncovered in their litigation against the government, where you had the government cooperating, coordinating, whatever you want to call it, with the platforms to take down misinformation and disinformation, all this stuff. | ||
| That Silicon Valley and the progressives don't like. | ||
| That can end, even without the courts, because the new government can just say, we're not going to do this anymore. | ||
| Americans get to speak their mind on these platforms. | ||
| And I think that's great news. | ||
| And also, Darren was just talking about this with you, but the giant constellation of sort of government-funded or government-contracted NGOs... | ||
| That have participated in the suppression of speech over the last several years. | ||
| Again, elections have consequences. | ||
| And this is one of the huge upsides of President Trump's re-election is those contracts can come to an end. | ||
| Now, obviously, you know, progressives, Silicon Valley, everyone who is fighting disinformation, they're not going to give up just because of the election. | ||
| They're going to take this to new fronts. | ||
| And that's where I think that it's really important that the FTC take investigative steps In the new administration under President Trump, because if the government is going to get out of the business here in the States of cooperating and colluding with the platforms to suppress the speech that they don't like, It's up to the FTC to make sure that that sort of cooperation and collusion doesn't move into the private sector. | ||
| No advertiser cartels, no cooperation among the platforms to say, hey, let's all just agree we're not going to allow this type of speech. | ||
| And I think that that's where the FTC and the FCC, the way that future Chairman Carr has talked about it, can do really, really important work. | ||
| And I'm very excited that I will get to be a part of what I hope is the Trump administration's strong push for I'm curious your thoughts on what you think their pivot is going to look like sort of on two fronts, right? | ||
| You talk about this collusion, this sort of public-private partnership, that equation equals then mass censorship of the American people, sort of taking out the public, right? | ||
| partnership. | ||
| Do you think that they look sort of overseas? | ||
| Like we said, so much of the censorship stuff can sort of emanate, particularly from the UK. | ||
| There's a lot of activity there. | ||
| Even Australia is pushing sort of interesting bills. | ||
| And then also to sort of, I guess, a corollary to that question, you know, CISA, right, you referenced that even the sort of NGO type ones, at least those that receive the taxpayer funds, the National Endowment of the Democracy, you know, those type of organizations. | ||
| Do you think that they can be reformed? | ||
| Or do you think that CISA and entities like that, that have proven that they're really only good for censorship, they haven't really had a stellar track record on anything cybersecurity wise, or should they just be shut down and defunded? | ||
| Or can they be changed from within? | ||
|
unidentified
|
My general view is that there are lots of things that the government ought to get rid of entirely, but that can be hard to do, especially And my experience, especially when I worked in Congress, I clerked for Clarence Thomas several years ago, and I worked in Congress confirming President Trump's judges. | |
| And my view of this is that personnel is policy. | ||
| And making these personnel decisions about who's going to run CISA, who's going to run the FCC, who's going to be at the FTC, who's going to be at the State Department sort of making these contracting decisions with these NGOs is critically important. | ||
| And some of this just has to be categorically shut down. | ||
| Some of it is too diseased to cure. | ||
| But others, I think that there can be cures to this sort of thing, but it becomes really important both to pick the right people to run these things and also, look, we have this problem. | ||
| I've written about it at the FTC. We have this problem where we have two different types of governments. | ||
| We have the government that we elect at the ballot box, which is the president who selects his cabinet, but then we have this massive bureaucratic apparatus underneath them That have been here before the election, and they think they're going to be here after the election, and they often sort of like operate for their own interests without thinking of the common good of you and me and our fellow Americans. | ||
| And I think that President Trump's election gives a real opportunity to the government and to us as Americans to address that problem, which is how do we get control of sort of the administrative state or the deep state, which is another name for it, That sort of operates independently of the political part of the government that you and I have voted for and tends to do stuff that's inconsistent with Americans' interests, even if that isn't what the American people voted for. | ||
| And I think that that's one of the big, important fights that President Trump is going to have, is sort of getting his arms around the deep state And turning it toward the interests of the American people, at least in my own experience at the FTC, I think one of the most important ways to do that is the power to remove officials. | ||
| And for a long time, Congress insulated officials kind of across the board from being removed by the sort of political operations of the politically appointed people at these branches. | ||
| The court has been scaling that back. | ||
| The court has been striking down removal protections. | ||
| I think that's moving in the right direction. | ||
| But I don't think we should pin all our hopes on just shutting down parts of the government. | ||
| Parts of it we're going to have to, but parts of it are going to be harder to do. | ||
| I think we need to pin our hopes on getting the right people politically appointed in the government and then taking very seriously that everyone in the government, From the lowest career official to the highest appointed official from President Trump works for the American people, and it is never in the interest of the American people to censor their speech. | ||
| This country depends on all of us being able to share our ideas, and bad speech doesn't go away because of censorship. | ||
| The only way to counter misinformation is real information, and that means we need the free exchange of ideas and a marketplace of ideas. | ||
| And I think that I am so excited about the prospects after this election of the president getting control of the deep state and turning the government in favor of the interests of the American people rather than against them. | ||
| Andrew, if people want to follow you, stay up to date with everything you're doing, I'm sure the audience rests very well, sleeps very well at night knowing that people like you are heading up the FTC, an actual government entity that we can support. | ||
| Truly, thank you for everything you've done. | ||
| Where can people go to stay up to date with everything you're working on? | ||
|
unidentified
|
You can follow me at afergusonftc on X, and you can go to the Commission's website, ftc.gov, and you can go to my biography page on ftc.gov website. | |
| It's got all of my dissents and concurrences where I talk about AI, censorship, and promoting innovation in our vibrant American economy. | ||
| You know you're a good guest when Mike Davis is texting me while you're on, talking, gassing you up, hyping you up. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Obviously, the posse loves Mike Davis. | |
| Yes, he is. | ||
| I think MSNBC agrees with me. | ||
| So does Jack Smith, maybe. | ||
| Andrew, thank you so much for joining us. | ||
| We will happily have you back on soon. | ||
| I would love to get more in depth on all of these issues. | ||
| It's near and dear to the War Room Posse's heart and mine, too. | ||
| Andrew, thank you so much for joining us. | ||
| And Warren Posse, thank you for hanging with me. | ||
| We're going to come to Dr. Naomi Wolf after the break. | ||
| We've got to go through, give you the signal, not noise, on the latest sort of HHS, vaccine, health-adjacent picks in Trump's cabinet, and how, indeed, we are going to Maha. | ||
| We're going to make America healthy again, and Dr. Naomi Wolf is a crucial part of that. | ||
| We'll be right back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Let's take down the CCD! War Room. | |
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Band. | ||
| You're back in the war room. | ||
| We are joined now by Dr. Naomi Wolf, who I just sort of want to tee it up for her and let her go off until the end of the show. | ||
| Just your sort of broad overarching analysis of a lot of Trump's cabinet picks, NIH director, HHS secretary, kind of all that. | ||
| Your thoughts on where we stand. | ||
| Yeah, well, he's a fast learner. | ||
| I've got to hand it to President Trump. | ||
| He pivots very, very quickly. | ||
| And I don't know whether that's that his picks were made in advance for some key health nominations and some were seen as duds by Maha and others were really, really good that just happened to follow them or if he actually learns that. | ||
| In real time as he's choosing and seeing the reaction. | ||
| But there were a slate of nominees that range from kind of a three in their reception by You know, general audiences, but especially the Make America Healthy Again team who's been watching us avidly. | ||
| And then there was an absolute home run or several, you know, home runs. | ||
| So basically, we all know about RFK Jr. having been first tapped to lead HHS. And that's going to be a fight. | ||
| Obviously, you know, there's a lot at stake. | ||
| A lot of powerful industries don't, you know, don't want I don't want this pick to go through and don't want to give that incredible amount of power to someone who, as I've said here recently on your show, knows how to read books. | ||
| The crimes that are buried in the records of the agencies that he'll be overseeing. | ||
| But last Friday, President Trump also released former Representative Dave Weldon to direct the CDC, which is really interesting. | ||
| He's, you know, a Republican former congressman from Florida. | ||
| He is, I would say, an uncontroversial pick. | ||
| But it is refreshing that the CDC, which was the site of so much wrongdoing, And it's going to be in the hands of someone who's at least not in the pocket of pharma or not in the pocket of, you know, these giant healthcare systems the way that Dr. Rochelle Walensky was. | ||
| There was a huge home run with the selection for running the FDA of Marty McCary. | ||
| And Marty McCary has been a favorite of kind of the Brownstone team. | ||
| That's a publication run by our friend Jeffrey Tucker, who Has been promoting the work of Marty Makari. | ||
| Marty Makari is a highly credentialed, highly trained kind of institutional health guy who has come forward during the last two years to be publicly critical, | ||
| including the Wall Street Journal, you know, which was the first legacy media outlet, as I recall, to run that kind of I think he's | ||
| popular. | ||
| There's been no resistance that I've seen from both Maha and legacy kind of establishment. | ||
| Now, there was a dud. | ||
| I mean, just to be honest, Jeannette Neshewa as the next Surgeon General really fell flat. | ||
| She's a former Fox commentator. | ||
| She's been a complete cheerleader. | ||
| It's a really surprising selection. | ||
| She's been a complete cheerleader for vaccines. | ||
| She's been on board repeating things that were just not true from the CDC about safe and effective You know, vaccines. | ||
| She was, believe it or not, in a dancing nurses video. | ||
| She has no record of having given any critical thought to the lockdowns or the mandates. | ||
| She's encouraged complete compliance, masking of children. | ||
| It's kind of a disastrous, from the point of view of MAHA, it's a disastrous selection. | ||
| And I think that the home run that followed, I think just yesterday, I hope was a reaction to the very negative response of Maha to Nishewat's selection. | ||
| And so yesterday, our favorite, favorite, favorite epidemiologist, our favorite band doctor, our favorite public health Dr. J. Bhattacharya of Stanford was tapped to run the National Institutes of Health. | ||
| And that's huge. | ||
| Why is that huge? | ||
| Dr. Bhattacharya is one of the signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration. | ||
| And the Great Barrington Declaration, as you recall, was an October 2020 A manifesto, essentially, that was signed by Dr. Bhattacharya, his colleague, Dr. Martin Kulldorff, then of Harvard, a distinguished infectious diseases epidemiologist, disclosure, a friend of mine. | ||
| I like to believe that Jay Bhattacharya is also a friend of mine, and also Dr. Snetra Gupta of Oxford. | ||
| Who's a vaccine specialist and also an epidemiologist. | ||
| All of these distinguished public health experts. | ||
| But the Great Barrington Declaration was very controversial. | ||
| If you go read it now, which I encourage everyone to do, It's insanely moderate, right? | ||
| Basically, what the Great Barrington Declaration says, and again, remember, this is October 2020, before the mandates and rollouts, the rollout of the vaccine, which took place a month later, that people had been locked at home, kids had been Forced away from the classroom. | ||
| And it basically says natural immunity is real. | ||
| Sooner or later we're going to reach herd immunity. | ||
| Young, healthy people are at very little risk from this, less than a serious flu. | ||
| They should be left alone to go to class, go to work. | ||
| You know, everyone should go back to school. | ||
| And basically the only people who are at serious risk from this disease are the very elderly and immunocompromised And they should be supported in kind of being protected. | ||
| They called it focused protection. | ||
| So basically they were saying, let everyone out of their cages. | ||
| And if people are at a special risk, give them support. | ||
| Help them get through this. | ||
| Completely same. | ||
| And Dr. Wolf, we're coming up against the end of the show. | ||
| We'll definitely have you back. | ||
| There's so much that we've got to go through. | ||
| But in the meantime, if people want to follow you, get all the Daily Cloud stuff, the books, where can they go to do that? | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| They really should go to the Pfizer Papers on Amazon and order multiple copies and support us at dailycloud.io and support me on Outspoken on Substack. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| I love your new set. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Happy Saturday. | |
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| I know. | ||
| The audience used to move, and then the audience was like, I'm getting seasick. | ||
| It needs to stop moving. | ||
| So I told the studio that they need to pause it. | ||
| A little upgrade from the palm trees. | ||
| Dr. Will, thank you so much for joining us on this lovely Saturday morning in Warren Posse. | ||
| As always, thank you for hanging out with me. | ||
| Quite a packed show. | ||
| I will see you back here on Monday. |
Export Selection