Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 28, 2025 - Bannon's War Room

48:56

Episode 4519: Visa Warfare; When Will Republicans Fight Back

Participants

Main voices

mike benz

05:20

natalie winters

18:01

Appearances

mike lindell

01:34

Clips

jake tapper

00:08

steve bannon

00:15

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Well, here you have somebody who took over $75,000 to give In the light of day, I'll just note.
		To give badges and official status to business people so they could flash the badge, get out of traffic stops, get out of other tight situations.
		Jen, it's not just the...
		We have him on tape.
		You played the tape.
		It is a classic example of corruption.
		So what stood out to me is a White House embracing corruption.
		What do you expect from our president?
		Who himself has been convicted 34 times.
		Who issued a blanket pardon to those who assaulted law enforcement.
		This is an insult to law enforcement who secured the evidence in this case.
		It's an insult to the jury that convicted the sheriff.
		And it's an insult to all Americans.
		And it comes on top of so much other.
		Corruption with the Qatari plane and the $2 billion UAE-backed investment in Trump's crypto business and selling access to Trump at the dinner.
		Some other pardons that are also involved with issues of selling access like that crypto dinner.
		So there's a pattern here.
		When people do this stuff, it comes at the expense of the American people.
		And I don't think they're going to tolerate it.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		This is the primal scream of a dying regime.
unidentified		Pray for our enemies, because we're going medieval on these people.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		I got a free shot at all these networks lying about the people.
unidentified		The people have had a belly full of it.
unidentified		I know you don't like hearing that.
mike benz ▲ ● ▼		I know you try to do everything in the world to stop that, but you're not going to stop it.
mike benz ▲ ● ▼		It's going to happen.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		And where do people like that go to share the big line?
unidentified		MAGA Media.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		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?
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		If that answer is to save my country, this country will be saved.
unidentified		War Room.
unidentified		Here's your host, Stephen K. Vann.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		It's Natalie Winters hosting today, May 28th, near Verlord 2025.
		five Always love the hot takes from Norm Eisen.
		I guess my only question is, I wonder how your future prison inmates are going to like being talked down in that horrible tone that you always like to bless us with on MSNBC.
		Of course, what are they talking about?
		All things.
		Joe Biden, corruption, President Trump.
		Here's the thing, and we're going to link it to what is, I think, probably on everyone's minds right now, especially here in the War Room Posse, right?
		Codifying the Doge Cup.
		The whole idea, right, the whole conversation that we're having right now about Joe Biden's health.
		Right?
		It's the limited hangout version.
		I'm not even going to say the names of the two people who apparently are on every mainstream outlet ever talking about their book Original Sin, which really should be published as an autobiography, or I guess it's missing my original sin or our original sin.
		It's not your original sin.
		I don't know about you guys.
		Probably your old tweets and Facebook posts.
		You could probably self-publish a book about Joe Biden's mental health decline and the stolen election.
		Not Jake Tapper.
		Oops, I guess I said his name, but you probably knew who I was talking about.
		But I think we have to have the uncomfortable conversation because what is playing out in real time right now when it comes to the refusal to codify these republic-saving doge cuts, it's not about Joe Biden's health or the fact that they lied to us about how Joe Biden was out to lunch, or I believe, as I told a CNN reporter, was, quote, essentially dead, and that's a quote that I think aged fairly well in light of recent events.
		But it's that they liked having a president who was not there mentally.
		Because to them, that's how you perpetuate and continue the status quo.
		And if there's anything we've seen on full display right now coming primarily from congressional Republicans, it is an undying, frankly, insatiable appetite to continue the status quo.
		You see it in the way that they're apoplectic over the unitary executive theory.
		That's a new slur in Washington, D.C. Well, they have their own version of the unitary executive theory.
		And that's called the administrative state, the deep state, the permanent political class, the in-your-face state.
		And it's not a theory.
		It's very real.
		and it's codified and it's the opposition that this show...
		And now what?
		We've passed Memorial Day.
		How many of these cuts have been codified?
		The only thing really keeping the whole doge thing afloat is that they made so many cuts at VA.
		The VA, that's what's sustaining any of their numbers that they have to brag about.
		And it's still only just a little north of 100,000.
		Right?
		The status quo, the business that they are fighting to keep perpetuating here, just a stone's throw away from where I am, is the business of screwing you over and take your pick, whether it's immigration policy, trade policy, trade deals, Ukraine aid, the forever wars, the PRC, take your pick on whatever threat they like to get you all gassed up and lit up over and then do absolutely nothing.
		Right?
		We're engaged in trench warfare, digging out the deep state every single day.
		And the best we can get from our elected betters is maybe tweet warfare.
		And frankly, half the tweets that the House GOP account puts out are so laughable, I almost want to become, I don't even know, a Democrat when they're tweeting, Americans need to get off the sidelines.
		Or if they say, we need to fight to hold these people and make them accountable for what they did.
		Yeah, you guys are the ones with the power.
		So do something about it.
		There's all this discussion about real masculinity.
		Well, I don't think real masculinity is sitting on the sidelines and tweeting about a country that's being invaded and overtaken by a bunch of, what, 10-plus, 20-plus illegal aliens?
		Right, all these stupid committees, all the people that took the selfies with Elon, the Doge committee.
		Where are all those people?
		They're on CODEL trips to Ukraine.
		And now they're tweeting in defense of inflating spending bills.
		It makes no sense.
		And frankly, if you really want to get to the heart of it, just like this idea of they want to limit the conversation about what Joe Biden was doing to the idea that, oh, it was the media that lied to us.
		No, Joe Biden was sick.
		No.
		They liked having a president who was essentially dead asleep at the wheel because they could implement their agenda and ram it through.
		The idea that there was one person who was controlling the puppet strings, that's called the swamp.
		That's why this show exists, and that's why they hate having new media, because it's people like you who've been able to adjust and shift the goalposts of what actual accountability looks like, and we no longer have to play through the controlled opposition paradigm of Fox News, the left-wing media, or congressional Republicans and think that accountability is found in tweets and strongly worded letters and stupid committees and stupid speeches.
		No.
		It's found in prison sentences and criminal investigations, not crappy book deals for Comer because you botched the Biden investigation 20 times over after every single investigative reporter, myself, this audience, people who we have on the show every single day included, handed you on a golden platter, a golden platter to do something, to have actual criminal referrals and actual indictments.
		And the best you could give to us was a book deal.
		How about this?
		I'll start a committee called the Committee to End All Committees.
		Because what the heck has the China Select Committee been doing?
		Have you guys been doing a good job of taking down the CCP?
		I don't think so.
	They're seizing islands in the Philippines, planting Chinese flags on it.
	And what are you guys doing?
	Tweeting.
unidentified		Wow.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		'cause people are a bunch of clowns and they're a bunch I would.
		That would probably not be particularly feminine of me, so I won't.
		But the crux of the issue, and we're going to bring, I think, very shortly Wade Miller on to get into where we stand with codifying these doge cuts.
		In 2016, President Trump was your voice.
		He gave you a seat at the table because he was not beholden to the Republican donor class in the Republican establishment.
		You've heard me say this dozens of times.
		It's the sort of, I would say, Magnum opus of Stephen K. Bannon, right?
		But now we have hit the fundamental bifurcation point whereby it's not a split in ideology because we won that war because of you guys, but it is a split.
		It is a fork in the road of tactics.
		And those same squishy establishment Republicans who are so performative, and if you were to chart them out...
		They don't have the will to fight.
		They don't have the tactics and they want to just tweet and they want to keep you in the dark and they want to insult your intelligence and be performative in their activism.
		Well, we didn't get here by being performative.
		We didn't get here by Stephen K. Bannon being performative when he chose to serve a four-month prison sentence.
		Nor was Peter Navarro and nor were the thousands of J6ers or the people praying the rosaries or the school board parents.
		Nothing about that was performative.
		So how about this?
		For all the tough talk we get from our congressional bettors, maybe you should muster up, I'll take one one-hundredth of the courage that this audience has had, that people like Stephen K. Bannon have had.
		To cut waste, fraud, and abuse.
		I'm not even talking about anything crazy.
		To cut waste, fraud, and abuse.
		That's what we're up against.
		That's poking the hornet's nest.
unidentified		Yeah, I'm fiscally conservative.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Okay, Paul Ryan.
		Okay, you guys know everything that was going on at USAID for years and you chose to do nothing about it.
		So spare me the fiscal conservatism.
		Really.
		We all know you're socially liberal.
		That's evidenced by your actions.
		And frankly, your pastimes and your extracurricular activities.
		But I guess we'll save that for another show.
		I believe we've got Wade Miller.
		Wade, you guys over at CRA are always doing the heavy lifting, the hardcore work on all things that is the black box of Congress.
		If you can sort of, we've got a few minutes, just start off walking the audience through where we sort of stand on these doge cuts, what you think the path ahead.
		I know you guys are working on some big stuff over there, but if you want to give us a little tease.
unidentified		And one of the big questions is, well, why wasn't this done on the reconciliation bill?
		The reason that most of the doge cuts were not done is because they couldn't be done on reconciliation because they're for discretionary spending.
		They're not mandatory spending accounts.
		And the Byrd rule in the Senate would probably find them to be extraneous, almost certainly find them to be extraneous, and would jettison them out.
		So if reconciliation wasn't the vehicle, what is?
		And Congress could bring forth a standalone bill to cut spending that has been identified by DOGE, but we all know that that would die in the Senate on a filibuster because the Senate needs 60 votes.
		So a standalone bill coming forward would just be a way for, you know, rhinos to make it look like they support DOGE.
		But not really.
		And so that's not an option.
		And so what does that leave us with?
		Well, you either need a major piece of leverage, like an appropriations bill or a CR or something like that, NDAA perhaps, that you could potentially get past the filibuster.
		Or there's some other processes that you've been hearing about.
		So rescissions.
		Rescissions are a way that the administration can...
		And if they have 45 days to act, if they act within that 45 days to affirm it, then that spending is cut.
		Now the danger with rescissions is that if Congress doesn't pass it or doesn't bring it up in 45 days, it fails and then it becomes legally a little bit more difficult.
		To actually codify those doge cuts if it's been rejected in a rescissions package.
		And so one other thing that we've been looking at, and we're researching it, and there's some precedent on this through the GAO, and OMB has written about this in 2021 and before, is what's called a pocket rescission.
		Now, the key to a pocket rescission is that it has to be done within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year, so August.
		And we're working on this.
		We've got a paper going into the technical details.
		We're hoping to have that out by the end of this week.
		We want to cross our I's, dot our T's.
		But if all of the math adds up here, and our legal analysis is correct, and we believe it will be, is that if you put forward a pocket rescission within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year, that Congress doesn't need to do anything.
		It just automatically goes into effect.
		And that would be the highest percentage or the highest the the the path forward that gives us the highest chance of success.
		Because if you do a regular rescissions package, there's a chance that a couple, two, three senators might reject it.
		And then that complicates the ability to actually cut those for this year.
		So our main focus right now is potentially if this is the the, you know, If this is correct, then this would be the preferred route.
		And that would call for, in that instance, being patient and waiting until August to do pocket rescissions as opposed to rescission packages sooner.
		Now, it does look like rescission packages are going to come soon.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		I want to hold you through because I think everyone's probably wondering, well, what have these people been doing with their time instead besides vacationing?
unidentified		Amen.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		We'll have you pick up where you left off.
		Hang with us.
		We'll be right back after this short break.
unidentified		Here's your host, Stephen K. Band.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to The War Room, where, of course, you've always got to be checking out birchgold.com slash Bannon or texting Bannon to 989898.
		I always want to say getting the latest installment of The End of the Dollar Empire, but I think we have graduated past that.
		But you know, gold has always been a hedge, despite, what is it now, the five or six books that Steve has written with them.
		So go get your copy of the latest pamphlet.
		I forget the title, but it's fantastic.
		We are still joined by the also lovely and fantastic Wade Miller.
		Wade, if you just want to sort of pick up where you left off, but most importantly, what our audience needs to know sort of as we progress, how they can be most useful, helpful, and force these weak Republicans to, I don't know, do something.
unidentified		Amen.
		You're speaking my language.
		So I think to kind of recap, there's two forms of rescission.
		One is a little bit more risky because it requires Congress to act.
		There's a chance they may not.
		I do believe that the White House is going to be, I think they announced today that they're going to be sending a package.
		There may be another package lined up.
		But the bulk of the doge cuts for this year, because when we're talking about rescissions, we're talking about spending for this year.
		The bulk of those cuts, it appears, can be done through a pocket rescission unilaterally through the White House.
		And if that's the case, it would be preferable for Congress to stay out of the way and allow the White House to essentially get most of this done in the August to September timeframe.
		I think what's useful for our audience is if we're asking Congress to stay out of the way because we don't trust that they're going to get it right, maybe they do a package or two, but do the rest through pocket rescissions.
		They need to start assuring us that they're going to enact doge cuts in fiscal year 26 through the appropriations process.
		We should be getting them on the record saying that they will not advance an appropriations process this fall.
		Unless it enacts doge cuts going into next year so that we don't have to do rescissions on the current identified doge cuts that they're already taken care of through all of fiscal year 26. So I think that that's a path forward.
		I think that it gives us a good strategy to support the White House in getting these done.
		It alleviates a little bit of the pressure because it gives us a path forward where the White House can achieve these doge cuts for this year.
		But we do need Congress to get all.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Wade, just give us one more minute and let the audience know.
		I think you guys are working on a paper, one of the wonderful research things you guys always put together.
		When it's going to be coming out, how the audience can read it, get up close and personal to it, really internalize it, and hopefully use it in their phone calls that I'm sure they will eventually be making to their members of Congress.
unidentified		Sure.
		So you can find us at Center for Renewing America.
		We're working on a paper.
		We're looking through the legal analysis right now.
		There's precedent for it.
		We hope to have that paper out later this week.
		We will disseminate it widely.
		Right now, it's a question of how expansive those powers are, not if those powers exist.
		And so we're really excited about this.
		If this is the thinking of the White House, then it could explain their strategy.
		I'm not privy to their strategy, but rescissions packages are coming forward.
		But I'm hoping that this pocket rescission strategy – Thank you, sir, for joining us.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		We will certainly have you back on soon.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		I'm sure Steve will want you on first thing when it's published.
unidentified		Thanks for having me on.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Of course.
		I believe I heard someone say things cannot be big and beautiful.
		In terms of spending bills, and I would say in the same way that I do not support body positivity, big is also not beautiful when it comes to government spending packages.
		Also, given that what they do with that big government, remember the slogan used to be, what was it?
		Big government sucks.
		I think that's probably too euphemistic because big government censors you, deplatforms you, debanks you, throws you and your children in prison, destroys your country, invades it with tens of millions of illegals, and then grants H-1B.
		visas to a bunch of legal third world people as well.
		So it's probably a little past the...
		But a bright spot in the Trump administration has always been the FTC in terms of what the chairman, Andrew Ferguson, has been doing to combat censorship.
		Today, the State Department announcing that they will be rescinding visas and, frankly, not giving them out to people who have been involved in the censorship of Americans.
		There's a very, very long list of those those names.
		But I wanted to bring on Chairman Ferguson just to sort of react to what the State Department is doing and how it sort of bolsters what you guys have been doing really since day one.
		And frankly, even before over at the FTC in terms of combating censorship.
		ship.
unidentified		Thank you.
		I think Secretary Rubio on this front is just doing a fabulous job.
		I mean, you know, being a guest in the United States is a privilege.
		And the idea that that privilege should be extended to people who hate this country, who want to scream about their hatred in the public square, that want to burn the flag is just absurd.
		So, you know, I think Secretary Rubio's approach to this and President Trump's approach to this is a long overdue.
		And it's such a breath of fresh air to make sure that if you are not an American, but you want to spend time in this country, at the very least, you can't openly despise and hate this country and foment violence against it.
		So kudos to Secretary Rubio.
		Steve's talked about this.
		Mike Benz has been on about this for a long time.
		But one of the biggest risks to American speech has been coming from abroad.
		A lot of the organizations that have been used by Democrats and by mainstream press to suppress ideas are from outside of the United States, foreign NGOs that come up with lists of disinformation and disfavored ideas.
		And then people here in the United States use that to suppress speech online and in the public square.
		So I think this is a big step forward for protecting Americans free speech.
		And frankly, look, you know, we've got.
		I talked about this with you back in December.
		The first is the government restricting speech.
		And then the second are big, powerful gateway-keeping platforms that restrict free speech.
		And at the very least, I think the Trump administration deserves a ton of credit thus far for taking the problem, both problems seriously, but at least within the government, making sure that we're doing everything we can.
		To prevent the government from ever participating in the censorship cartel ever again.
		It was extremely clear during the Biden administration that government was working hand in hand with cooperative tech platforms.
		This is what the Missouri against Biden lawsuit was all about, to suppress free speech by Americans.
		And so I think that the steps that Secretary Rubio at the State Department and President Trump throughout the whole government have taken.
		We've been on this since day one at the FTC.
		One of the first things that we did after President Trump was inaugurated was that we asked the public in a formal request for information to weigh in on examples that individuals had suffered with censorship online and to tell us about their experiences.
		Because we're looking for two things that are covered by the laws that we enforce.
		The first are, you know, platforms have terms of service.
		Those terms of service are part of the inducement that platforms offer to people to come and spend their time on that platform instead of a different platform.
		And, you know, when you and I buy something, if we join like a subscription service or if we decide to post content online.
		It's all pursuant to a form of contract that we enter into with the platforms.
		And that requires us to uphold our end of the bargain as users, but it also requires the platforms to abide by their terms of service.
		And so one of the things that I think is really important for us to find out is, were big online platforms making censorship decisions that were contrary to the promises they were making people in their terms of service?
		And so that's part of what this request for information was, where, you know, are you a user?
		did you experience censorship that was inconsistent with the terms you had signed up for when you used the platform?
		And then the second thing, and that's because one of the laws that the FTC enforces prohibits deceptive acts and practices.
		And, you know, a classic example of deception is promising a consumer you're going to do one thing in order to get that consumer to use your And then the second is, you know, a lot of censorship decisions made by the big tech platforms, particularly in the lead-up to the catastrophe of 2020 and in 2020, We're sort of seem to be made in lockstep.
		Like a lot of these platforms had seemingly identical censorship, you know, content moderation, as they like to call it, policies.
		And the antitrust laws categorically forbid, you know, polluting with your competitors to injure consumers.
		And so one of the things that we are trying to figure out was, was there potentially collusion among big tech platforms to set?
		You know, here are all the ideas that we're collectively going to permit on our platform, and here are all the ideas that we aren't.
		rather than competing with each other, which is the whole notion of American free enterprise is based on competition, rather than competing with each other to convince consumers to use their products, they were, you know, the question that I think we need to figure out is we're
		So we've had this request for information out.
		We've gotten thousands of comments, and we've been reviewing them as they come in.
		And a lot of them were consumer commenters explaining.
		You know, how they suffered under the censorship cartel.
		But we also got comments from, like, the big tech-backed think tanks and firms.
		And one of the most consistent accusations level at the FTC that I've seen is that the Supreme Court already said that government is not allowed to police content moderation.
		And they all point to this decision the Supreme Court decided two years ago called Net Choice against Paxton.
		And that case was about a Florida law and a Texas law that regulated censorship decisions Andrew, we're coming up against a break.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		If I can hold you through it, just for one more minute.
		Censorship is not a victimless crime.
		I think our audience is probably ground zero for a lot of that.
		We'll be right back after this short break.
		More on the H-1Bs.
		Mike Benz, PAC Show, Don't Go Anywhere.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		War Room.
unidentified		Here's your host, Stephen K. Mann.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		you you Welcome back to The War Room, where, of course, you've got to be checking out birchgold.com slash Bannon, texting Bannon to 989898.
		Gold has always been a hedge.
		Find out why.
		Talk to Philip Patrick and the team.
		Chairman Ferguson, just a minute or two left with you.
		I'm sure our audience, I know the chat, if they want to submit comments or reach out to you guys or just talk all things censorship with you guys, where can they go to do that?
		And just real brief, what do you think the sort of expected timeline on these investigations, the just talking to these platforms, what do you think that that looks like in terms of actually getting to the bottom of the censorship industrial complex?
unidentified		There's a link to get to the RFI.
		In terms of timeline, look, we're reviewing the comments, and I can't generally comment about, you know, ongoing law enforcement investigations, but I think what I can say is, And I'm not the censorship police.
		I'm not the speech police.
		But I am the market power police.
		And if market power is contributing to censorship, the FTC is going to get to the bottom of it.
		That's what the president sent me here to do, and that's what I'm going to do.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		I think the posse, as do I, thank you for everything you guys have been doing.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		If they want to follow you and keep up to date with everything you're working on, where can they go to do that?
unidentified		AfergusonFTC is my Twitter handle, and that's where we post a lot of our stuff.
unidentified		So follow me there.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Thank you so much.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		We'll have you back on soon.
unidentified		Thanks, Natalie.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Honored to be joined now by someone whose work I have read for a very long time.
		Wonderful author, really has been ahead of the curve.
		Writing, legal information, gathering on all things H-1B visas.
		That is John Miano, who I think we have up now.
		John, I think this is your first time on War Room.
		I can't believe it's been so long overdue.
		But obviously, we're hearing about how the State Department is doing all these unique visa programs to, you know, defer or stop all foreign students, the deportations of people who are writing op-eds.
		There's a lot of chatter.
		Yet, in the same breath, we're seeing, what is it, 120,000?
		At least publicly announced.
		I'm sure there's more than the spouses and the kids, the whole thing.
		But H-1B visa is being announced.
		Can you sort of walk the audience through your take on that as someone who has followed this issue for a very, very long time?
		And if there's anything that we can do about it?
unidentified		Yes, Ali, it's great to be here for the first time.
		I've admired your work for a long time as well.
		The big thing that people are aware of is the H-1B visa program.
		And the H-1B program is designed to replace Americans with cheap foreign workers.
		The tech industry got Congress to enact legislation making it legal to replace Americans with these foreign workers and to pay these foreign workers very low wages.
		The only problem with the H-1B program from their perspective is their limits on the number of visas.
		So what they've been doing is going behind Congress and going to the deep state, the administrative state, to create work programs through regulation.
		And the great god Obama in 2015 proclaimed from on high that the executive has unlimited authority to allow aliens to work through regulation so they can create these new work programs.
		One of these is the DACA program.
		The one that I'm involved in right now is work permits for H-1B spouses.
		So not only do the H-1B workers get to work entirely through regulation with no approval for Congress, we have regulations allowing spouses of H-1B workers to work.
		And we've now brought this challenge to the Supreme Court.
		This is now the sixth challenge brought to the Supreme Court, asking whether the executive does have this power to allow work through regulation.
		And unfortunately, over the past 10 years, in spite of this issue being repeatedly brought to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court has punded every time and not decided.
		They either refuse to take the cases or they've not decided the issue when they have.
		So now we have this great immigration chaos.
		So each time we create one of these work programs, there are lawsuits challenging whether the work program is valid.
		The people coming in on the work program then sue the states for benefits like in-state tuition, driver's licenses.
		And then when someone like President Trump tries to get rid of these programs, they get sued on that end.
		Because of this legal chaos of uncertainty, a law that the Supreme Court is allowed to create, we're basically self-sustaining ourselves with lawsuits right now.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		So what does the Trump administration need to do to sort out this issue and is resolving it legally through the Supreme Court, the cases you guys have going on?
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Is that the best way that provides the most cover?
unidentified		Well, our great hope is that we presume that this use of the administrative state to undermine average American workers is contrary to the concepts of MAGA.
		And that the response of the Trump administration will be to tell this report, yeah, you need to hear this so that we can end these endless work programs, you know, DACA, Biden's parole program.
		That have been created and are now self-sustaining.
		The other issue, though, with the Trump administration is that they seem to have done a flip-flop on H-1B visas.
		When Trump ran for president in 2016, he campaigned with people who've been replaced by H-1B workers and promised he'd get rid of H-1B.
		Now we see him saying that he's all in support of H-1B, and it's very troubling because to see Donald Trump, of all people, out there saying, I support replacing Americans with cheap foreign workers.
		So that's quite scary because if Donald Trump can't get rid of this H-1B cesspool, then what is it going to take?
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Just curious, last question before I let you go.
		If you compare, contrast what the Biden regime did in terms of, you know, raising the caps or just, I'm not even talking illegal immigration, legal immigration, the HMB, all the various programs that they've rolled out, what is sort of the disparity between what the Trump administration is doing?
		On that front right now versus what Biden is doing?
		In other words, right now, are they sort of proceeding at the same pace in terms of importing these foreign workers?
		Or has the Trump administration done anything meaningful yet to slow down basically the great replacement of the American worker?
unidentified		Well, sadly, I have to say is that what you can say about Donald Trump is he hasn't made things worse.
		That basically every president since the first Bush...
		Immigration levels in the United States are just absurdly high, and it's one of the prime reasons why the average American has not seen a pay raise since about 1970.
		So, one of the bright signs during the first Trump administration is that President Trump did step in and block the TVA from replacing Americans with H-1B workers.
		But there was no substantive regulation, no cutback on any of these programs through regulations that occurred to Trump.
		Things just basically stayed the same.
		And right now they're staying the same.
		You know, like Trump has tried to get rid of the Biden parole program.
		under Obama, Obama's created work permits for people on parole.
		You see, the ability to work...
		So parole was originally intended for short-term stays in the United States to come in here, like have emergency surgery or something that the legal system couldn't account for.
		But the Obama administration allowed these people to have work permits, which allows, in theory, if you can work, you can stay indefinitely on parole.
		And then Biden was flowing 30,000 people a year.
		I mean, this is why it's important for the Supreme Court to say yes or no, the administrative state can create these programs or not.
		And either way, yes or no, a yes decision limits litigation.
		A no decision limits litigation.
		But the Supreme Court's current path of doing nothing John, I know the audience's heads are blowing up.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		I always say the H-1B issue is probably my prime radicalized through your book, sold out.
		I think it's back in 2015.
		It's truer every day.
		If people want to get the book, stay up to date with everything you're working on, the case.
		I know you occasionally write, I think, for...
		Where can people go to keep up with your work?
unidentified		Well, to keep up with the legal stuff is the Immigration Reform Law Institute early.
		As you're correct, I try it as frequently as I have time for the Center for Immigration Studies, sayis.org.
		And also, I've been working with U.S. tech workers on some discrimination cases involving H-1B as well.
		And you can find me agitating on Twitter as well on H1B.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Thank you, sir, for joining us.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		An honor.
unidentified		Thank you for having me.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Of course.
		I think we are joined now by Mike Benz.
		Mike, we've got a few minutes.
		I'm just going to tee you up.
		I'm sure by now everyone's seen what the State Department has done in terms of rescinding not just all foreign suit of visas, but also visas for people involved in the censorship of Americans.
		Your thoughts, sir?
mike benz ▲ ● ▼		This is a shot across the bow at the government censors around the world.
		This applies to Europe.
		This applies to Latin America.
		This applies to Brazil.
		We are facing, as we are solving the censorship crisis here in the United States, the U.S. censors in exile have fled to their in-power government allies in foreign governments to use foreign censorship laws.
		To coerce American social media companies and American citizens about what they can and cannot post online.
		And I'm overjoyed to see free speech diplomacy pouring out of this State Department, not just from their shutdown of the Global Engagement Center and its remnants, the reorganization of the State Department through the shutdown of the Democracy Rights and Labor Group, which was a major global censorship vector.
		The shutdown of USAID and the billions of censorship funding that ultimately poured out of that organ.
		But now they are sending a message to global speech regulators that we will fight back if they try to enforce the clause of foreign law speech control.
		Right now, the EU, the code of practice on disinformation, will be mandatory in just one month's time in the European Union.
		This is the secret weapon of the global censors to be able to get back control over X and Facebook and Instagram after the free speech efforts by Elon and to some extent Mark Zuckerberg.
		And this is a message that if EU regulators decide to go too far on that, they will be persona non grata here in the US.
		They will not be able to visit their little vacation homes in Miami or Martha's Vineyard or New York City.
		And as well as especially to the nation of Brazil, which is currently completely captive by a rogue Brazilian Supreme Court who happens to work directly.
		as he was the head of the censorship sector of the Brazilian Supreme Court.
		And it's looking like...
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		I know the audience is going to kill me for interrupting you, but don't go anywhere.
		He will be with us after this short commercial break.
		We'll be right back.
		Mike Benz on the other side.
unidentified		Let's take down the CCP.
		War Room.
		Here's your host, Stephen K. Van.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		you Welcome back to The War Room.
		Quick programming note for those of you who are blessed enough to be on the West Coast living in Washington State.
		I and James O'Keefe are actually going to be...
		He can be the headliner.
		I'll be the opening act.
		He obviously has wonderful work in Yakima, Washington, for their kind of Lincoln Day dinner, yakima.gop.
		For the tickets, August 9th, meet and greets, dinner, all the fun stuff.
		I always look forward to getting to meet the posse in person, in the flesh.
		It's so fun.
		Remember, they took years of our lives away from us when they said we couldn't meet in person.
		So we got to make up for lost time.
		And of course, in the Washington area, I think the FBI has been opening a ton of investigations into targeted violence against Christians coming at the hands of, you guessed it, Antifa, which I guess is just a euphemistic word nowadays for the Democratic Party.
		That's Yakima.GOP.
		August 9th.
		Come see me, James O'Keefe.
		Who knows?
		Maybe some special guests.
		He's always traveling.
		Maybe he'll have to come by and say hi, though I would demand that you wear a tux like you did, I think, one time here on The War Room.
		Mike, we've got a few minutes left.
		You were just getting to the good stuff.
		If you want to pick up where you left off on this whole, you know, using visa warfare, that's what we'll call it.
mike benz ▲ ● ▼		Yes, well, but this is an appropriate escalation for the attacks on American sovereignty.
		That are being done by foreign governments and their U.S. shadow cabinet, shadow diplomacy, allied core within the blob of the United States.
		And the fact is, is a message has to be sent that if you attack us, you're not welcome here.
		If you attack us, there will be consequences for you.
		And this is done in the name of American values.
		This is the sort of thing that the U.S. was doing.
		Constantly, in the 20th century, to promote free speech and to fight against autocratic governments who would censor the speech of their citizens and journalists.
		And frankly, I think that much more needs to be done on this front.
		And while this is incredible action, the fact is, if you look at a case like Brazil, Brazil is one of the most severe examples of government abuse of censorship to imprison and to mass censor.
		Tens of millions of citizens in Brazil in order to keep the in-power government, which is highly corrupt, from being exposed.
		In fact, the judge has even ruled the Marais in Brazil that calling Lula corrupt is effectively against the law because it might impact elections if you if you are if you allege that that that president is corrupt.
		Now, you could call Bolsonaro corrupt and others from his party.
		But the fact is, is.
		Obviously, at the State Department layer, it's a very, very critical one.
		And I was also delighted to see the U.S. Embassy in Brazil echo Secretary Rubio's message about the visa stoppage.
		I believe sanctions are also likely a necessary part of the toolkit to be applied so that it's not just the visas, but that there are economic inducements.
		And beyond that, I believe that cooperation between the U.S. military and the Brazilian military needs to be addressed.
		The fact is, is Brazil's military is completely reliant on the U.S. They get their equipment.
		They get their training.
		They're the second largest military in the Western Hemisphere, and they've had a total free check while the human rights abuses in Brazil.
		In addition to that, I believe that Brazil's involvement in the international narcotics trade has to be examined by this government The PCC cartel is already infiltrating here in Miami and is a big part of this I should say of this cartel soup that the Trump administration has been focused on to get rid of illegal narcotics by declaring drug gangs to be terrorists.
		Well, there's a big fat one in Brazil and I believe that that should also be a focus of this as well, given that the head of that cartel, the PCC cartel, actually said in a recorded video that he hoped that Lula would win because it was better for his own business.
		It appears that the Lula regime is protecting the narco gangs.
		And I believe that's a national security threat to the United States of America.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Mike Benz, you break things down like most people can't or frankly probably don't want to because I don't know about you.
		All this stuff is so hard to track and they make it that way by design.
		But we're very grateful for the analysis and insight you bring to the worm.
		If people want to follow you and get much more of it, where can they go to do that?
mike benz ▲ ● ▼		Follow me on X at Mike Benz Cyber.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Thank you, sir.
		I'm just giving out compliments left and right today.
		Thank you so much for joining us.
		It's a good day, despite the fact that congressional Republicans suck and are doing absolutely nothing except plunging this country further into, you know, at least Democrats are forthright with their depravity and perversion and weird sexualities.
unidentified		I guess what I'm about to say is twofold.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Republicans lie to you, not just frankly about that stuff, like I said, what they're doing in their extracurricular activities, but they insult your intelligence when they make you think that just because they take a selfie with Elon and join the Doge caucus that we're not going to notice that they want to send, what, hundreds of billions of dollars to Ukraine and think that USAID is how we're going to advance soft power and defeat the Chinese Communist Party.
		Yeah, it's doing so well in Africa.
		What, upwards of 90% of countries signed on to the Belt and Road Initiative?
		Yeah, I guess by D.C. metrics, that's probably efficient and effective.
		We're not buying it here in the war room.
		But what we are buying in the war room, how's that for a segue, is MyPillow.
		Mike Lindell joins us now from outside a courthouse, the Denver courthouse, I believe.
		Hit us with the latest in your life and what you've got going on at MyPillow.
		You've got about a minute and a half.
mike lindell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, real quick, everybody.
		Remember, I worked personally with President Bolsonaro in Brazil.
		There's an example of a country, if you don't get to pay for ballots, hand counted, what can happen to here in the U.S. 132 countries have banned electronic voting machines.
		I have fought this for five years, and here I am at the courthouse, this, in Denver, Colorado, the federal courthouse, this coming Monday, my pillow and myself go to jury trial, and we need your help.
		It's as simple as that.
		We need the War Room Posse's help.
		So what we've decided to do, Natalie.
		The keys to dream sheets that we have in the inventory, we're going to run this for $49.98 just to generate resources for this trial.
		We have to win, everybody.
		This will be the gateway to saving our country.
		I really believe that.
		I told our president, we will not let your four years be in vain.
		$49.98, any size, any color, promo code war room.
		And then also, I'm gonna give you, if you buy today, Any purchase, you get that free.
		Plus, if you go to the website and you scroll down and you click on Steve, there's the special.
		There's the Game of the Dream Sheets.
		If you buy $100 or more, I'm going to match you with $100 in free digital gifts.
		And you can click on, if you see me holding the American flag there, you can learn all about this lawsuit and what's going to happen and how we're going to win this.
		Call 1-800-873-1062.
		The most sought-after promo code in the United States and around the world.
		War Room.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		I like it.
		Around the world.
		All the countries that are busy censoring Americans.
unidentified		Well, maybe we'll have to strip some of the War Room promo code, too.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Warren Posse, thank you for hanging with me.
natalie winters ▲ ● ▼		Steve's taking the six.

▲