Feb. 26, 2025 - Bannon's War Room
48:02
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| Sir, are you committed to ending the weaponization of government, to holding those accountable who participated in the weaponization of government? | ||
| Hold it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This is a good one. | |
| Is everybody listening? | ||
| Deranged Jack Smith. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We're going to call it the deranged Jack Smith signing for Bill. | |
| Go ahead. | ||
| One law firm that provided pro bono legal services to the special counsel's office under Jack Smith's leadership was Covington& Burling. | ||
| As a result of those actions, we're now going to be suspending and putting under review the security clearances for the attorneys and employees at that firm who worked with Jack Smith's team. | ||
| And we're going to continue holding the people who were responsible for the weaponization of government, who supported it, accountable for what they did. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And you'll be doing this with other firms as time goes by, right? | |
| We're looking at sort of the whole panoply of options. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The weaponization of our system by law firms. | |
| Even pro bono work they're doing just in order to clog up government, stop government. | ||
| And nobody knows about it more than me. | ||
| And hopefully that'll never happen again. | ||
| Covington and Burlington? | ||
| Covington and Burlington, okay. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Mr. President, may I ask you a question about Europe? | |
| So long term, do you plan to maintain the number of U.S. troops stations? | ||
| Wait, I just want to savor this one, please. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Who would like this pen? | |
| Why don't you send it to Jack Smith? | ||
|
unidentified
|
A deranged person. | |
| Boom! | ||
| Tuesday, 25 February, Year of the Lord, 2025. Wow. | ||
| Covington and Burley, one of the most prominent law firms in a city that's run by law firms. | ||
| Eric Holder's law firm. | ||
| Julie Kelly joins me. | ||
| Julie, one thing I didn't know until today, I knew they were using outside law firms for help and assistance. | ||
| I didn't realize they were doing it pro bono. | ||
| That's stunning. | ||
| President Trump drops a hammer, strips the security clearance. | ||
| Tell me how big a deal this is, ma'am. | ||
| Well, I believe it was Politico who broke the story that Jack Smith had received $140,000 in pro bono work from a law firm that has now been identified as Covington and Burling, to your point, a very influential law firm in Washington, D.C., based there. | ||
| Some of the notable names people might be familiar with, Eric Holder, Dana Remus, who was Joe Biden's general counsel for, I believe, the first two years of his administration, Victoria Newland. | ||
| Lanny Brewer, the old Clinton guy, Lanny Brewer. | ||
| So this is stacked with Democratic operatives. | ||
| The president today signing that executive order. | ||
| I haven't read it, but just based on his comments, stripping the security clearance of all of the employees that appears to be associated with that firm, but also hinting that he's not dumb, that other law firms who assisted in the lawfare against him could face the same fate. | ||
| Why is this shocking? | ||
| It shows you President Trump is prepared to knock down barriers, guardrails, whatever, because the law firms run this town. | ||
| And they go back and forth between government work and go back to the law firm. | ||
| But the law firms run – the law firms are many times the lobbyist firms. | ||
| But even if they're not, they run the lobbyist firms. | ||
| They are the most powerful institutions in this city are the big law firms. | ||
| Why is this so breathtaking, what he did? | ||
| Well, I mean, it's definitely a shot across the bow, not just to Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is under investigation by the Department of Justice. | ||
| Of course, Pam Bondi announcing that on her first day, related to her weaponization working group under the president's executive order. | ||
| So that is forthcoming. | ||
| But also, to your point, because the law firms do run the city, and look at what they're doing now. | ||
| Filing lawsuit after lawsuit against the President and the White House for changes that he wants to make to the federal government. | ||
| So they are still continuing the lawfare. | ||
| They're just on the other side of it now. | ||
| And hopefully those law firms will be under review as well. | ||
| I hope their next step is what he does, is take and ban them all from government contracts. | ||
| I mean, that's what I would like to see. | ||
| We've got a bunch of us, a punch list to go through. | ||
| The situation of special counsel, why did the Supreme Court not take this up on its emergency docket, ma'am? | ||
| Right. | ||
| So this is one issue that we've been covering. | ||
| Hampton Dellinger, who is the Biden family friend, worked at Boyce Schiller, speaking of law firms, with Hunter Biden. | ||
| During the Burisma scandal, he was appointed by Joe Biden to head of the Office of Special Counsel. | ||
| And in that position, you wield great authority. | ||
| He has 129 employees in his office, and he oversees basically four major statutes overseeing federal employment, and he can make recommendations for another separate board to look into. | ||
| What his investigations and meet out consequences. | ||
| So he was fired, Hampton Dellinger. | ||
| He was fired by Donald Trump on February 7th. | ||
| He filed a lawsuit a few days later, again with the help of these law firms in Washington, seeking to be reinstated. | ||
| Judge Amy Berman Jackson, one of our favorite Obama judges, a well-known Trump hater on the bench, issued a temporary restraining order reversing his firing, saying it did not meet the standards. | ||
| You had to have some sort of reason to fire him and reinstated him. | ||
| And this temporary restraining order is set to expire tomorrow on Wednesday. | ||
| But the president and the White House sought emergency intervention at the Supreme Court to put an end to her temporary restraining order. | ||
| On Friday, last Friday, Steve, the Supreme Court refused to become involved and said, oh, we'll just wait and see what happens after this temporary restraining order expires on Wednesday to see if the judge will consider a preliminary injunction that could put them there indefinitely. | ||
| Well, guess what happened on the very same day the Supreme Court weaseled out of taking a stand, especially on something that's such a no-brainer. | ||
| This is a presidential appointment under the executive branch. | ||
| He, of course, has authority to fire this individual who has longtime ties to Joe Biden and his family. | ||
| The very same day the Supreme Court refuses to step in, Hampton Dellinger sends a complaint to the board above him that handles his investigation. | ||
| It's called the Merit Systems Protection Board. | ||
| Also, all three Biden appointees, by the way. | ||
| And a side note, the chairwoman who was appointed by Joe Biden, She also was dismissed by President Trump. | ||
| She filed a lawsuit to be reinstated and was reinstated by Judge Rudy Contreras, friend of Peter Strzok. | ||
| This is how dirty Washington, D.C. is, as you know, see better than anyone. | ||
| So she is still the chairman of the three-member board that is taking these referrals, investigations, complaints by Hampton Dellinger. | ||
| And what he did on Friday is send the board complaints by six federal employees. | ||
| Who were dismissed under the president's executive, the Doge Order, that were removing people from the payroll, federal payroll, who were on probationary status. | ||
| So these are government employees who have been on the federal payroll for one to two years, depending on the agency, before their civil service protections kick in. | ||
| So the president, of course, is cutting back the federal workforce. | ||
| Dismissed everyone on probationary status. | ||
| I think there were 150,000, Steve, in one report, that 150,000 probationary employees that had just been hired in the past year or so. | ||
| And here's Hampton Bellinger, only there because of Amy Berman Jackson and the cowardice of the Supreme Court, now sending investigations to this three-member board seeking to reinstate employees who have been fired by the President of the United States. | ||
| Here's what's concerning to me. | ||
| This is very much – and John Heilman kind of blurted this out the other day on MSNBC. They were talking. | ||
| He says, hey, look, the courts – he said the courts bailed us out essentially in the 2020 election, and we've got to look to the courts to bail us out now. | ||
| What I find shocking, this is the first time the Supreme Court was approached to put some of the emergency docket, and they didn't take it up. | ||
| That does not bode well if that is, and I think that caught a number of people, I know, by shock because I thought this was kind of a no-brainer for them to take up. | ||
| Your thoughts? | ||
| If this is the trend, and I've said, hey, I don't see the Supreme Court wanting to get involved in this. | ||
| I just don't. | ||
|
unidentified
|
They've had a terrible track record, I think. | |
| Right, we're sort of back to 2020 where they punted and they didn't want to take up these difficult issues, but this really was an easy one. | ||
| I mean, you have a Biden appointee, political appointee, in an office, a powerful one that can make personnel decisions, especially targeting the White House, which, Steve, you saw during the first Trump administration. | ||
| There was one Hatch Act violation or investigation after another. | ||
| This is something that this Office of Special Counsel has purview of. | ||
| So it's not an inconsequential office, but then the Supreme Court sends a message to the other judges. | ||
| We are not going to step in. | ||
| So what happened today? | ||
| You had another Biden-appointed judge in his temporary restraining order demand that the Trump administration dole out billions of dollars in foreign assistance because he claimed that the plaintiffs who sued the Trump administration are suffering harm from that. | ||
| So it's not even that he just entered a temporary restraining order on behalf of the plaintiffs. | ||
| He's out forcing them to send checks, disbursed federal funds, over the head of the president, over the order of the president, to all these foreign aid grantees. | ||
| Forcing them to do that by tonight at midnight, or he will consider contempt of court charges against whom? | ||
| The Secretary of State? | ||
| The Department of Justice? | ||
| President Trump? | ||
| This is how out of control these judges are, which you and I have covered for years, of course, and you've been subjected to this yourself. | ||
| But now, because the Supreme Court has been so cowardly in confronting their own federal colleagues on the bench, they are just running amok. | ||
| But anything else on this? | ||
| Like I said, at first, they weren't getting many wins at the first level. | ||
| But with the Supreme Court not stepping in here, you should assume, particularly as they file in these radical urban areas like New York and Philadelphia, and particularly Washington, D.C., you're just not seeing the Supreme Court stepping in here. | ||
| Any other observations on the legal aspects of President Trump's restructuring in the doge work? | ||
| Well, obviously, the DOGE, you know, access to data has been limited in some instances and prohibited in others because, and this is what you and I have talked about, the big one when it comes to Elon Musk, and it appears that today the White House just identified the individual who is the administrator of DOGE, this department, not Elon Musk. | ||
| But as we've talked about, Judge Tanya Chukkin, who presided over a Jack Smith J-6 indictment against the president appears to be setting up a court battle to disqualify Elon Musk under the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, saying he's a principal officer. | ||
| He's acting in that capacity. | ||
| He needed to be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. | ||
| So, of course, Elon Musk and Doge, a lot of arrows being slinged at them at different directions. | ||
| I assume at some point this also will go to the Supreme Court. | ||
| But in the more immediate term, Steve, I'll be watching to see what Amy Berman Jackson does tomorrow with this temporary restraining order expiring tomorrow against keeping Hampton-Bellinger in his job. | ||
| If she does turn that into a preliminary injunction or orders another hearing on that, we may see another appeal by the Trump White House and DOJ back to the Supreme Court asking for immediate Intervention, and then we'll see what the court does. | ||
| There were two dissents, Justices Gorsuch and Alito, who did want to vacate that temporary restraining order, making very clear that this was, you know, an article to presidential authority to fire Hampton Dellinger, and Justice Roberts saying, no, let's wait a few more days and see what happens. | ||
| Well, now we saw what happened. | ||
| By the way, let's do a split screen right now. | ||
| They're voting on the House. | ||
| The House did get up at about 6.15, oh, 6.20. | ||
| They are voting on this budget resolution. | ||
| Eric Tietzel from Center for Renewing America is going to join us in a moment. | ||
| A couple more things for you, Julie. | ||
| Dan Bongino, a firestorm. | ||
| The appointment of Dan Bongino is now making Cash Patel look like Judge Webster. | ||
| The left is completely melting down on Dan Bongino. | ||
| Your thoughts, Dan, as Deputy Director of the FBI and teamed up with the Cash Patel. | ||
| I have a piece up on my substack about the Dream Team, and they really are. | ||
| But more importantly, the media meltdown and Democratic lawmakers like Adam Schiff, of course, who has to suspect what is coming his way, just, you know, they're terrified, and they really should be. | ||
| I was surprised to see the announcement that Dan had been appointed as Deputy Director of the FBI, but of course pleasantly so. | ||
| We'll all miss his show. | ||
| You know, he has a very powerful voice, but he's making a huge sacrifice to take on this job, and it is going to be massive. | ||
| They have a very long list of scandals that they need to expose. | ||
| It looks like they're already getting to work. | ||
| Today, I've seen reporting on an investigation into Jim Comey running the so-called honeypot scheme into President Trump's 2016 campaign that's been, I believe, disclosed by whistleblowers. | ||
| So there's a lot more coming. | ||
| And I do think, and Steve, you and I talked about this, that courage is contagious. | ||
| And you do see Congress now and even senators stepping up, demanding documents and demanding records. | ||
| And planning hearings and investigations on their own into these very same topics. | ||
| So, this is going... | ||
| It appears to be a collaborative effort between the FBI, the DOJ under Pambandi, and Congress to really expose all of these scandals, hold people accountable, and get rid of these bad apples, whether they're fired or some of them hopefully end up behind bars. | ||
| The shocking thing about this, this is how much President Trump wants a restructuring and reform and investigation into the FBI is that traditionally, I think, for the 116-year history, over the 100-year history of the FBI, the deputy has always been an agent who knows the building and knows how to manage the building. | ||
| President Trump, with both Cash and Dan, are saying, hey, I don't care about the building. | ||
| What I care about is some reform over there and get this thing sorted. | ||
| And so the message, I think, has been sent loud and clear. | ||
| Two of the toughest hombres I know, Bongino and Kash Patel over there. | ||
| Julie, let's play it. | ||
| We've got a quick cold open here, a quick clip I want to play before I bring you back on J6. Let's go ahead and play it. | ||
| The Justice Department is under attack. | ||
|
unidentified
|
They're coming after the people that want to uphold the laws that exist. | |
| And that's... | ||
|
unidentified
|
It should be terrifying to everyone. | |
| Sarah Levine and Sean Brennan were federal prosecutors on the Justice Department's biggest investigation, the attack on the Capitol, until they were fired by the Trump administration January 31st. | ||
| Why were you fired? | ||
| Because I did my job. | ||
| I mean, it's really that simple. | ||
| I went in, I followed the facts, I followed the law. | ||
| And I got fired because I did exactly what I was supposed to do. | ||
| I think we know what we did was right. | ||
| No regrets. | ||
| Absolutely none. | ||
| What we did was justice. | ||
| Justice for 140 police officers. | ||
| Wounded January 6, 2021. Levine and Brennan were hired about a year and a half ago to prosecute cases from the riot. | ||
| And in how many of your cases was the defendant acquitted? | ||
| None. | ||
| None. | ||
| Which tells you what? | ||
| The evidence was overwhelming. | ||
| Overwhelming, but last month, the president pardoned even the most violent convicts, whom he calls by another name. | ||
| So this is January 6th. | ||
| These are the hostages. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Approximately 1,500 for a pardon. | |
| Not long after the ink was dry, letters of termination hit the Justice Department. | ||
| The letters rewrote history, calling the prosecution itself, in the words of the president, a grave national injustice. | ||
| Anyone who has watched videos of what happened on January 6th... | ||
| knows that the grave of national injustice was not the decision to prosecute the rioters. | ||
| The grave of national injustice has been the Department of Justice turning its back on those law enforcement officers, those members of Congress, and all of those victims who were affected. | ||
| The hunters now become the hunted. | ||
| Julie Kelly, 60 minutes the week after they have... | ||
| The German authorities that want to arrest people for bad thoughts. | ||
| Now we have this. | ||
| You've been closer to this than anybody. | ||
| Your observations of this, ma'am. | ||
| So, just so people know, I did clip those interviews from 60 Minutes. | ||
| They're available on my AskJulie underscore Kelly, too. | ||
| And I think the last time I checked, that clip had 1.5 million views, which is great, because I want these J6 prosecutors... | ||
| I want people to hear how easily they lied. | ||
| Those two prosecutors were not fired because they did their job, as Sarah Levine said, or followed the rule of law. | ||
| They were brought on as temporary hires to handle this massive caseload. | ||
| You know, at the end, almost 1,600 defendants. | ||
| They were brought on temporarily. | ||
| What happened and what the DOJ discovered right after Trump took office is that the Biden's DOJ, after the president won the election, converted those temporary hires into permanent employees. | ||
| And so what the DOJ discovered, I believe it was Amal Bovee who discovered this, said, no, no, no. | ||
| You're back. | ||
| You were temporary hires. | ||
| The capital siege unit, as they called it, has been shut down. | ||
| The J-6ers have been pardoned. | ||
| There will be no further investigation. | ||
| But Steve, look at how easily they lie. | ||
| And shame on Scott Pelley, of course, because he has helped bolster the January 6th insurrection narrative, like he just said, about 140 police officers being injured. | ||
| Never seen any documentation to back that up. | ||
| It doesn't matter, though. | ||
| But for them to brag... | ||
| That the DOJ, which they do, has a 100% conviction rate before jurors in Washington. | ||
| This is after almost three years of trials. | ||
| The first trial was March 2022. Not a single J6er has walked out of a courtroom after being before a D.C. jury and been fully acquitted. | ||
| They think, or they're trying to convince us, that it's because the evidence is so overwhelming. | ||
| No. | ||
| It is because of deceptive prosecutors like those two and everyone else that we've seen working in cahoots with judges who we now see have open animus towards President Trump and everyone around him. | ||
| And then putting these poor J6ers before jurors in a city that voted 93% for Joe Biden and then 92% for Kamala Harris. | ||
| They were still putting J6ers on trial after the election. | ||
| After Kamala Harris won, 92% of the vote in Washington. | ||
| That's how destructive that process was, and that is what the president has talked about. | ||
| He said these people have been treated very unfairly. | ||
| And when you have Sarah Levine and that other prosecutor come out, like so many have, and talk about their guilty to the rule of law and the overwhelming evidence and the attack on the Capitol, etc. | ||
| They're actually making our argument for us and the president because it underscores how destructive and reckless and biased the entire process was from the very beginning. | ||
| What can be done? | ||
| What's your recommendation of the smug nature of these two in this whole process? | ||
| What is Julie Kelly's recommendation here? | ||
| Well, I know that there's an investigation by Ed Martin, the U.S. attorney, into the use of 1512C2, the obstruction statute that was overturned by the Supreme Court last June, nonetheless brought against 300-plus J6ers, including the president. | ||
| So there's an investigation into how those decisions were made. | ||
| How can prosecutors like these two be held accountable? | ||
| I would go back to where we started, and that's these law firms. | ||
| These prosecutors are basically under investigation right now for abusing their authority and bringing an obstruction statute, unlawfully, abusively prosecuting American citizens. | ||
| If you hire these prosecutors, know that they are under investigation. | ||
| And we will look at your entire law firm, just like we looked at Covington and Burley. | ||
| That's really the only thing that can be done, except... | ||
| At the higher level, say, people like Matthew Graves, the D.C. U.S. attorney, who handled the J-6 prosecution for almost three years, and really investigating him for selective, vindictive prosecution, which should be something easy to prove. | ||
| And, of course, then, Cambodia already announcing in the DOJ an investigation into FBI abuses related to the J6 investigations and prosecutions. | ||
| But we have to keep beating this drum. | ||
| We cannot let this, you know, take a back burner to all the other FBI scandals and DOJ because there are many. | ||
| But nothing like this has happened in American history. | ||
| People have to pay the price, and this can never be allowed to happen again. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's terrible. | |
| Julie Kelly, Substack, social media, everything to keep up with all your investigation into all this. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Declassified with Julie Kelly. | |
| Also, I have work at Real Clear Investigations and on ex-Julie underscore Kelly, too. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Julie, thank you for joining us today. | |
| Take the time away. | ||
| I appreciate you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Nobody better than Julie Kelly. | |
| Okay, we come back. | ||
| The vote, I think the actual vote itself is going to commence at 6.30. | ||
| Couldn't be better timing. | ||
| Eric Tietzler from the CRA, Center for Renewing America, which has given us Russ's vote, Mark Paoletta, Jeff Clark, and a host of other folks that are in the administration is going to and a host of other folks that are in the administration is going to join us to break Also out there is that it looks like we're going to get a full year CR. At least that's the word coming out from a number of congressmen in House leadership. | ||
| We'll break that down too. | ||
| Something else you have to break down is precious metals, the opportunity to use it as a hedge in times of financial turbulence. | ||
| Birchgold.com slash Bannon, the end of the dollar empire, totally free, six free installment. | ||
| Modern monetary theory, the idea that broke the world. | ||
| How did it break the world? | ||
| Well, baby, you're about to find out over the next couple of weeks. | ||
| As we drill down on how do you actually try to stop the United States government of having a two trillion dollar per year deficit? | ||
| What's the pain and agony that has to go into that? | ||
| Birchgold.com. | ||
| Check it out today. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Mann. | |
| Okay, this is a hell of an evening show. | ||
| We gave you Trump live, or Trump from the Oval. | ||
| Throwing bombs. | ||
| Then Benz, as only Benz can do in the breakdown of the deep state, particularly this demonic and perverted chat room. | ||
| I mean, sick. | ||
| And then the Julie Kelly, as only she can do on J6 and all the other legal. | ||
| And I tell you, one of the things I don't like, and we talked about this, the Supreme Court did not take that case up in the emergency docket. | ||
| Stay tuned in this space. | ||
| That is not a good sign, folks. | ||
| Not a good sign. | ||
| Not a good sign. | ||
| What is a good sign is Birch Gold's available to you now. | ||
| Consumer price or consumer confidence looks like you dropped today. | ||
| I'm going to have a breakdown of that tomorrow. | ||
| Inflation fears are back. | ||
| They're going to be back until you get control of the federal spending. | ||
| Keep telling you that. | ||
| There's no other solution to this. | ||
| It ain't a supply chain problem. | ||
| It's a too-many-dollars problem. | ||
| Too-many-dollars chasing too few goods. | ||
| It's a problem, and it's not going away. | ||
| Right now, we do the split screen. | ||
| They're voting on the House floor. | ||
| Eric Tietzel's going to join us in a moment from CR explain all of this to you. | ||
| Birchgold.com, they will explain, Philip Patrick, particularly, It's not relevant just the price of gold. | ||
| It's the converging factors that continue to not just drive it higher but make it a hedge against times of financial turbulence. | ||
| We're going to have turbulence. | ||
| You're going to have to. | ||
| You've got to. | ||
| We're too far gone financially, and this is a restructuring. | ||
| This is kind of a turnaround, and it needs an intervention. | ||
| We have not had that intervention yet. | ||
| Birchgold.com. | ||
| End of the dollar empire. | ||
| See the crazy idea that they all globbed onto that got us in this situation. | ||
| Sick and perverted as it is, you have to understand it. | ||
| And understand what your bettors thought was a program to prosperity. | ||
| It's a road to perdition. | ||
| Birchgold.com slash Bannon ended the dollar empire. | ||
| As I told you, a finance professor at a significant... | ||
| Public University is now having his finance class read it because it's so accessible to kind of understand debt, deficits, bricks, currency, all of it. | ||
| Also, Jim Rickards, jimrickards.com slash war room. | ||
| Make sure you go there now and you get strategic intelligence. | ||
| If you like capital markets and geopolitics, this is the newsletter for you. | ||
| He has specialty newsletters too, but this is the one, the general one he puts out. | ||
| It's a must-read. | ||
| Also, he throws in a free book that's kind of mesmerizing about capital markets and artificial intelligence. | ||
| Jim Rickards, who's one of the great contributors here at the War Room, RickardsWarRoom.com. | ||
| Make sure you put in promo code Bannon and you get a discount and you get the free book too. | ||
| Strategic Intelligence, you're going to want to get it. | ||
| Eric Tietzel, thank you for joining us. | ||
| Eric, what are we, in the split screen, if we get that, what is actually happening? | ||
| Explain to our audience what in the hell is happening right now. | ||
| This is, we do a pretty good job of breaking this down, but man, oh man, this one's confusing. | ||
| What is going on, sir? | ||
| Yeah, great question, and thanks for having me, Steve. | ||
| They make this complicated on purpose, right? | ||
| That's what Congress is for. | ||
| That's what leadership is for, to ensure that you, the voters, don't understand what's going on. | ||
| And therefore, it's a lot harder to hold your member of Congress accountable for what's going on because they obfuscate and they confuse. | ||
| What's happening right here is what we in the business refer to as a bed check vote. | ||
| It's utterly meaningless, does nothing other than draw people out of the woodwork and get them to the floor and try to give leadership a sense of who's actually in the building. | ||
| After this vote, they will move to a vote to pass the House version of the budget resolution that sort of creates a framework for reconciliation. | ||
| So, let me get this right. | ||
| This reconciliation, this does not have anything to do with the fiscal year we're in, the fiscal year of 2025, which started on 1 October of last year, and it goes to 30 September of this year. | ||
| That is, we still have until the midnight on the 14th of March to deal with that, right? | ||
| We can either pass single appropriations bills, an entire appropriations bill, negotiate with the Senate, do all that, or we can either kick the can down the road if we need more time for 30 or 60 days by a continuing resolution, or we could just do a continuing resolution to the end of the year. | ||
| That is what would deal with 2025, correct? | ||
| Correct. | ||
| There's about six months left in this fiscal year. | ||
| It would end on September 30th. | ||
| And so nothing they're doing today has anything to do with funding the government up until that date. | ||
| Your listeners will recall that there was a big fight back in December over what to do with funding the government. | ||
| And at that point in time, we kicked the can to March 14th. | ||
| And now we're discussing what to do before March 14th or to let the government shut down. | ||
| The vote tonight has to do with reconciliation, which is an entirely separate process, but one that also has a lot to do with federal spending. | ||
| And then you've also got the debt ceiling that has to be dealt with and a whole host of other questions that are all kind of thrown into the jumble there. | ||
| But let's go back to – to do reconciliation, what triggers this because – and I don't want to say it's a gimmick. | ||
| What triggers this is you have to have a budget resolution, correct? | ||
| That's kind of the starting point, the foundational element that then you can do all these reconciliations to that budget resolution, correct? | ||
| That's exactly right. | ||
| So this – it's a framework, and House leaders and committee staffers have been pulling together a framework called a resolution. | ||
| And it includes instructions to committees of jurisdiction. | ||
| And it says to them, we need you to take this resolution and cut X number of dollars from federal spending within the purview of your committee. | ||
| Or, in a couple of cases, including on the House side, Ways and Means, which deals with taxes, they actually increased the credit limit. | ||
| In their instruction with the intent of giving the committee room to do Trump's tax cuts, right? | ||
| So the total budget resolution includes a whole host of cuts and a little bit of increases to dealing with renewing the president's tax cut plan that was originally passed back in 2017. So this is the first step of broader reconciliation. | ||
| First step. | ||
| Now, when they talk about this budget resolution and this budget, This budget is not for fiscal year 2025, correct? | ||
| This is actually a resolution of a budget that would be for fiscal year 26? | ||
| That's correct, right. | ||
| This has actually very little to do with funding the government. | ||
| This has to do with mandatory spending that's already set in law and that typically isn't dealt with in a standard appropriations process that has to do more with the stuff that exists outside of mandatory spending. | ||
| Like I said, they intentionally make this extraordinarily confusing and complicated so that they get what they want. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| And it's over 10 years. | ||
| So when we hear that they're talking about $2 trillion of cuts and that 800 bana that is going to come from Medicaid, that is over a 10-year time frame, is it not, sir? | ||
| That is typically how this is done, yes. | ||
| There is talk about using gimmicks in different ways to extend that or shorten it. | ||
| Talk about... | ||
| What the baseline that you're determining this growth or cut from might be. | ||
| But generally speaking, they use a 10-year budget window. | ||
| That's right. | ||
| So if we talk about either the budget resolution for next year or beyond or the CR that will take this fiscal, because we have argued on this show, you know, your former boss... | ||
| Russ Foley went to OMB that DOGE, this whole DOGE process, somehow has to be merged into or under the supervision of OMB and has to get into the appropriations process because somewhere the DOGE cuts have to get kind of codified into a system. | ||
| Where would you see that happening? | ||
| Would you see that happening in the CR that we're going to do between now and March 24th? | ||
| Or do you see that happening as a fallout after this budget resolution? | ||
| I mean whether it's a trillion dollars of waste, fraud, and abuse, Elon fines, or if it's $100 billion, regardless of the number, where does any number in DOGE actually go into a process that becomes a process that we know it starts to cut something that we call the annual deficit? where does any number in DOGE actually go into a Great question. | ||
| And the answer is all of the above. | ||
| So we're going to start. | ||
| Most likely with a CR. Now, conservatives initially are going to balk at this, right? | ||
| Because we know what a CR is. | ||
| A CR is what happens when you punt on doing your job as a member of Congress. | ||
| Congress. | ||
| You're supposed to do a full appropriations process every single year where all of the committees come together. | ||
| They budget for their committee. | ||
| You pass a bill, you reconcile it with whatever the Senate has done, and there's your budget for the year. | ||
| This almost never happens. | ||
| Instead, we kick the can down the road through CRs so that at the end of the year, a lobbyist can pull an omnibus bill out of the drawer on Christmas Eve and shove it down your throats. | ||
| That's how the swamp gets their way, and CRs are typically a tool for doing that. | ||
| We are living in what I think is a fairly unprecedented moment where for the first time, certainly in my lifetime, the president of the United States and his team, including Elon Musk and Russ Vogt, and really virtually every member of the team is committed to meaningfully and really virtually every member of the team is committed to meaningfully wreaking havoc on the deep state, including | ||
| already seen it through the executive actions, through shutting down the CFPB, through shutting down USAID, and there's more to come. | ||
| So a CR in this specific instance is a little bit different from typical. | ||
| What we're doing is actually paving the way for the government to continue to operate with the President of the United States, Elon Musk, Russ Vogt& Company at the controls so that they can continue to gut it as they have been doing. | ||
| Meanwhile, we are also greasing the skids through a CR for reconciliation. | ||
| Which is going to be a huge means through which they actually follow up on what the administration is doing by enacting real meaningful cuts, along with regulatory reform and funding for the border and funding for the military and several other of the president's key initiatives. | ||
| And then here's the real kicker. | ||
| That CR that goes until the end of September is something that RussVote through OMB can come back to and say, We know that you appropriated X number of dollars here. | ||
| We haven't spent it. | ||
| And in fact, here's a package of rescissions and impoundments that we're going to ask Congress to consider and claw that money back. | ||
| So the money that's appropriated via this CR here before March 14th, in all likelihood, is not actually going to be spent, probably, again, for the first time in my entire life. | ||
| Okay, so note to War Room Posse, take your number two pencil out because for the first time we've explained exactly where this theory of the unified executive theory is now going to come into the budget process because what you're hearing is that after the CR is passed and there's going to be a lot of bitching and moaning in this audience, | ||
| including at this microphone, what they're saying is that, okay, Don't worry because that's a ceiling. | ||
| Doesn't mean that's the money that's going to be spent. | ||
| And then Russ Vogt and others through the impoundment process first and this other process second. | ||
| But the impoundment process is going to say either we're not going to spend it or it can be reprogrammed because that's the – the Constitution says the chief executive and that's what chief executives do. | ||
| That one, baby, will quickly go into federal court, will it not, Eric? | ||
| Yeah, undoubtedly, just as so many of the other actions have done, and we think we'll prevail there. | ||
| The theory of impoundment and the unitary executive and the executive's power over spending is basic. | ||
| It's rational. | ||
| In fact, it's common sense. | ||
| It goes all the way back to the founding of the country. | ||
| You see this sort of executive discretion in virtually every element of the administration, right? | ||
| The president, as the commander-in-chief, gets to dictate How we fight our wars, right? | ||
| He tells the generals, this is the strategy. | ||
| He doesn't have to go to Congress for that. | ||
| The president, as the head of the Department of Justice, says to Kash Patel, these are the priorities and these aren't the priorities, so that they can administer justice according to those presidential prerogatives. | ||
| It's exactly the same when it comes to spending. | ||
| Congress has the power of the purse. | ||
| They hand the money over. | ||
| But the President of the United States in the Constitution is instructed to take care that the law be faithfully executed. | ||
| And that means if he can get it done for 50% of what Congress has appropriated, he, of course, is not constitutionally prohibited from saving taxpayer money, right? | ||
| The court's going to see that. | ||
| This has never been adjudicated, despite what some people will tell you. | ||
| The central holding... | ||
| Of impoundment has never been before the Supreme Court, and we think it is that will prevail. | ||
| If I can, going back to your other point, Steve, the skepticism over CR is completely warranted. | ||
| Politicians have been saying to us for decades, just trust me, we'll come back to that. | ||
| And so you have every right to look askance at a claim like that. | ||
| We've heard it all before. | ||
| What's different here... | ||
| Is this president at this time with this team? | ||
| And I think we've already seen in the first month that they've been in office that they are putting their money when their mouth is. | ||
| And I, for one, trust that they're actually going to follow through and do what they say they're going to do. | ||
| Last question. | ||
| On this budget resolution tonight, correct me if I'm wrong, the House version that they're going to vote on after they do the bed check, if they ever get to actual vote, and they must be pretty confident. | ||
| They have the votes to pass it, to go through with it. | ||
| Does it not give us a bigger overall – does not debt go to like 130 percent of GDP? Isn't it higher than what's on the table previously, sir? | ||
| Yeah, these models will show different things, and people are going to look at how they are developing the models and judge for themselves how valid they are. | ||
| But the biggest – The biggest part of the model is the question of how much this stimulates economic growth and therefore how much additional revenue you can expect from it. | ||
| And my view is to say that if you have this massive agenda that includes deregulation across the American economy and in particular in the energy sector and it decreases taxes all across the economy and that secures the border. | ||
| And that does all of these other things that are necessary to generate the kind of economic growth that we know is possible, that the American people are capable of producing, that they will exceed what is modeled, and that in fact this won't blow up the deficit. | ||
| But it also does include some safeguards to ensure that they have to do cuts in order to grant the freedom to do additional tasks. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| Is that dynamic scoring? | ||
| And I take it the CBO report, the way I look, it has a growth rate of 1.8%, which is pretty anemic. | ||
| Is your growth rate at CRA, when you guys model this out, is it higher? | ||
| Is it 2, 2.5, 3? | ||
| What do you use as your growth rate? | ||
| The growth rate that I understand that the house is using is about 2.8, which is a fairly average. | ||
| As I understand it, actually fairly modest, especially given the extreme lengths to which they're going to unleash the American economy. | ||
| I certainly think it could go higher. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Okay, we'll break that down and comment tomorrow. | ||
| Okay, Eric, how many guys are left at CRA? Isn't everybody in the... | ||
| No, seriously, isn't everybody in the... | ||
| The Trump administration right now, it's you, a Marine, and who else? | ||
| You got a couple of guys there holding the fort? | ||
| Yeah, we got a great team. | ||
| We did, in fact, deploy Easy Company into the administration, and they're fighting the good fight. | ||
| It's a great problem to have. | ||
| If it wasn't our team, it would be somebody else's, and that would be too bad for America. | ||
| So I'm glad they're gone. | ||
| But if you know anybody who wants a job with America's leading America First organization, have them send their resume my right way. | ||
| We're hiring. | ||
| High-class problem. | ||
| Social media, where do people go to get you, Eric? | ||
| Sure. | ||
| I'm on X, at Eric Tietzel, and they can also go to at America Renewing Center and follow all the great work that our organization is doing. | ||
| Thank you, brother. | ||
| Great explanation. | ||
| That's happening right now. | ||
| Here, I'll be following up on social media at the end of the show, which will be a couple of minutes. | ||
| 800-958-1000. | ||
| Take that number down. | ||
| 800-958-1000. | ||
| Tax Network USA. As you can tell right there, there's going to be a gap. | ||
| They're going to need all the tax revenue possible. | ||
| And until the Trump tax cuts get extended, they'll be looking for revenue everywhere. | ||
| If you got a letter from the IRS, don't let it sit in the drawer. | ||
| It's like a cancer that will metastasize. | ||
| It's not going to go away. | ||
| Talk to the team. | ||
| 800-958-1000. | ||
| At Tax Network USA or go to tnusa.com slash Bannon right now. | ||
| Free consultation. | ||
| They'll tell you if they can help. | ||
| If they can't, you call the IRS yourself. | ||
| If they can, strike a deal with them. | ||
| These guys will help you out. | ||
| They know how to negotiate with the Internal Revenue Service, which ain't easy. | ||
| 800-958-1000. | ||
| Do it today. | ||
| Also, on Friday, I'm speaking in Tarrant County, Texas. | ||
| In the War Room Posse, if there's still tickets available, I think there are. | ||
| Some standing room and some general admission. | ||
| Check it out today. | ||
| I'll be meeting and greeting everybody. | ||
| Brought to you by Patriot Mobile, Glenn Story and the team. | ||
| A company with great coverage based upon standard carriers and they believe in your values. | ||
| A Christian company that ties, I think, 10% to various charities and philanthropic groups. | ||
| Plan a story. | ||
|
unidentified
|
PatriotMobile.com. | |
| Stephen K. Bannon here. | ||
| We're going to be back at 10 a.m. | ||
| Eastern Standard Time tomorrow morning. | ||
| We're jammed wall-to-wall-to-wall as tomorrow we break down this budget, the entire budget exercise, geopolitics, the geoeconomic strategy of President Trump, all of it. | ||
| 10 a.m. | ||
| Eastern Time, live, back here in the world. |
Export Selection