Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 29, 2025 - Bannon's War Room

48:46

Episode 4520: And Then They Came For The Tariffs

Participants

Main voices

peter navarro

05:38

steve bannon

29:36

Appearances

joe allen

02:59

Clips

andrew ross sorkin

00:17

jake tapper

00:08

mika brzezinski

00:38

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
mika brzezinski ▲ ● ▼		The Federal Trade Court has blocked most of President Trump's trade tariffs.
		A three-judge panel on the International Court of Trade yesterday ruled that the president did not have the authority to impose the sweeping tariffs.
		The judges found that Trump's use of the decades-old International Emergency Economic Powers Act Did not quote delegate an unbounded tariff authority to the president and that Trump's tariffs lacked quote any identifiable limits.
		Lawyers for the Trump administration have already said that they will appeal.
unidentified		And we are so pleased, not just on behalf of our states, but just all states and all consumers, and especially small businesses, that were on the verge of being hammered by these tariffs, which really are taxes and tax increases.
		So we're very happy about this decision, but you're correct.
		The Trump administration has already indicated that they're going to try to get a stay on the Court of International Trade's decision, which was very sweeping, and put a halt within 10 days to all of these tariffs, essentially.
		We'll see what the court does.
		The court really issued a very strong opinion.
		They essentially made a decision on the merits of the case.
		And what is essentially a final decision by them, even though the states, we were asking for a preliminary injunction.
		So they actually went a little further than we were even asking for.
		So they're very strong in their decision.
		We'll see what they say when the Trump administration asks for a stay.
		Have you spoken to the president?
		And ultimately, what's his reaction to what we heard?
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		Haven't spoken to the president yet, but I've spoken to people who have spoken to the president.
		Look, we're in a situation now, big picture here is IEPA.
		We were using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
		There's no question that there's an economic emergency with respect to both uses that we had.
		One is we are in a world where...
		We will continue to press on that.
		At the same time, we invoked that rule.
		To stop what has been 20 million illegal aliens streaming into our country, driving down wages, taking jobs away, that's an economic emergency.
		On top of that, the world continues to steal about a trillion dollars a year, as measured by the trade deficit.
		And that's an economic emergency because it's transferring our wealth abroad.
		So we think we have a strong case.
		Yes, we will immediately appeal and try to stay the ruling.
		But at the same time, the court, interestingly enough, basically said we were right, just use different rules and laws.
		So nothing has really changed here in that sense.
		Countries call us and tell us they want a deal.
		So these deals are going to happen.
		So that's kind of where we're at.
		And it's troublesome here because if you look broadly at the pattern, we've got courts in this country who are basically engaged in attacks on the American people.
		The president ran on stopping the fentanyl poisoning, stopping international trade unfair practices from stealing our factories and jobs.
		And courts keep getting in the way of that.
		The courts get in the way of trying to deal with the border issues.
		Now they're getting in the way of trying to deal with the fentanyl crisis.
		And that's where we stand here.
		And I think I think part of what's going to be important about this ruling demonstrates yet again to the American people that the judiciary in this country has been weaponized in ways which are contrary to their interests.
unidentified		If you actually listened to what the Trump's lawyers were arguing in court, it is befuddling.
		They were saying that any emergency order...
		Then they said any of the relief that they put out into the world as a result of that emergency order cannot be reviewed by a judge.
		Effectively, you could tax maple syrup in Canada to try and impact fentanyl in the U.S. Absurd stuff.
		And no judge could review it.
		And as A.G. Mays pointed out, these tariffs trickle down to us.
		So they could put in a thousand, you know, what, a thousand percent tariff on any good, which would trickle down to us without any congressional approval and without any court being able to strike it down.
		That's how powerful the judge's order was yesterday.
		And really a rebuke of the Trump administration's belief that they are immune to review.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		If you look at the kind of things we've already done, it kind of gives you a roadmap on that.
		There's all sorts of numbers out there.
		There's 122.
		There's 301.
		There's 232.
		There's 338.
		There's all sorts of things we can do well within the law.
		But look, we think that what we've done already We have a situation where the bond market, we've seen like a 50 basis point increase in yields in the 10-year since April 2nd.
		And a lot of the hysteria around the big, beautiful tax bill centers on the Congressional Budget Office scoring that bill in a way which says there's going to be a $3.7 trillion addition to America's national debt over the next 10 years.
		And so, of course, you got to finance that and that drives interest rates up and heads explode.
		When, in fact, if you do the math properly and you look at.
		The CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, historically has been very bad at estimating impacts of tax bills.
		In the 2017 tax cut that President Trump did, They got that totally wrong.
		They underestimated the GDP growth by a full percentage point.
		And what that does, if they make that same mistake here, which they have done, when you add that, that's about $2 trillion of additional revenue because you've got greater economic activity.
unidentified		Peter, you also have the revenue from the tariffs, which I saw your opinion piece in The Hill.
unidentified		I just want to get back to the tariffs because you don't have that revenue.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's another $2 trillion.
unidentified		If you don't have the legal authority to use it, though— We should not be the grand defenders of Harvard University.
		We should be the ones calling for billions of dollars to go to vocational education.
		Wrong.
		They have a $70 billion endowment.
		Hold on, hold on, it's Max.
		You get a tax deduction from donating to the Harvard rowing team.
		You get a tax deduction for getting students another sushi bar.
		It is all about just people trying to retain social class.
		It is a whole elitist play.
		We all know that.
		Harvard can defend themselves.
		Not one person at this table can name one advancement that occurred from a taxpayer-funded project at Harvard in the last five years.
		That's not true.
		There's tons of scientific research going on at Harvard.
		They have hospitals.
		I mean, that is absolutely.
		And by the way, don't let.
		That's completely wrong.
		And also, let me say, this is Viktor Orban, right?
		This is Hungary.
		This is what authoritarians do.
		They go for universities because they don't want dissent.
		So when you are actually, it's not about Harvard.
		It's about academic freedom.
		And that is a real thing.
		It has nothing to do with, you know, being fancy or having a tax deduction.
		We're talking about politics here.
		And the Democrats have a ton of things to focus on.
		Medicaid cuts, snap cuts, giveaways to the rich.
		Harvard can handle themselves.
		People should not get a tax deduction for giving to Harvard.
		And they have $70 billion.
		They don't need any more.
		I just want to say one last thing.
		It's Harvard today.
		It's every other college tomorrow.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		This kind of court ruling, the judge, I mean, look, the lead judge.
unidentified		If the ruling said, Peter, we've been talking.
		We're talking about this.
		Page 34, 35, they say, basically, you're in your right if you use section 122.
		Why didn't you guys do that from the beginning?
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		Well, Section 122 only gives you 150 days.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		So there's your answer right there.
unidentified		So Section 122, if you use this now for 150 days, could it be a bridge to 301 or a bridge to 232?
unidentified		What are you thinking more long-term?
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		You can be the strategist on that, but those are the kinds of thoughts.
		And look, if anybody thinks this caused the administration by surprise, think again.
		Okay?
		Because you could see in the oral arguments where those...
		The lead judge there ruled against the 232s originally.
		And had to get overturned by the appeals court.
		So that gives you an idea of the bias against the president's tariff policy right on that court.
		But I think the big picture here is we've got a very strong case with IEPA, but the court basically tells us if we lose that, we just do some other thing.
		So nothing's really changed.
		I want to say this to the world.
		You're cheating us.
		We're coming after you.
		Deal.
		And let's make this right because ultimately what's at stake here is the global international environment getting in a way where it's fair to America and thereby, if it's fair to America and we restructure this thing in a way, we'll have just more stability in terms of financial flows and capital and everything like that.
		It's wildly out of balance now.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		This is the primal scream of a dying regime.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		Pray for our enemies.
unidentified		Because we're going medieval on these people.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		I got a free shot at all these networks lying about the people.
		The people have 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.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		And where do people like that go to share the big lie?
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. Bannon.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		It's Thursday, 29 May, year of our Lord.
		2025.
		And then they came for the tariffs.
		Remember, the three lines of work.
		One, stop the kinetic part of the Third World War from spreading and shut it down, have people lay their guns down, President Trump all over that.
		Number two is to stop the invasion of the southern border, secure it, and then deport 13 million, not just the ones from the insane asylum and not just the bad hombres, but all 13 million invaders that came in here.
		In conjunction with the illegitimate Biden regime.
		Remember that term?
		And the others, the economics.
		Essentially, the business model of the country, how we're going to finance it, and changing part of that, a central part of that, is restructuring the commercial relationships of the world so the United States is not, the people in the United States are not continually hammered.
		By the Lords of Easy Money and the big tech corporations and the Chinese Communist Party and others that have taken advantage of, not taken advantage, worked in conjunctions with the elites.
		So last night, the only thing the Democrats have going for them, all the polling Democrats, worst I've ever seen.
		They just had a big analysis about their abundance policy, the abundance.
		It's got 16% support among Democrats.
		Populism, populist economic policies.
		I think have 56% or 60% support among Democrats.
		Unfortunately, they don't have any populist, economic populist.
		They don't exist over there.
		It's all woke.
unidentified		It's all cultural.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		The only thing they got going for them is a judicial insurrection of these radical judges.
		And yesterday, a three-judge panel, and Peter, the only thing I would disagree with is Peter's Dr. Navarro's assessment.
		I don't think it's an obscure court.
		It is the court that deals with trade.
		And they essentially laid a blanket opinion that President Trump can't do what he's doing.
		There's really not an emergency.
		Au contraire.
		We beg to differ.
		This is going to get a little Andrew Jackson-y before it's over.
		You can see where this is headed.
		Short commercial break.
		We're going to make it all make sense.
		In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
		And you are here in the war room.
		short break.
unidentified		Here's your host, Stephen K. Band.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		Here's your host, In the essentially reshoring and rebuilding of American manufacturing and the reason that, you know, a couple of trillion dollars, not from sovereign wealth funds, but from real companies have already been, you know, committed to being invested by publicly traded companies.
		They've told their shareholders.
		Is because of the tariffs.
		And what President Trump is saying is a complete package.
		Deregulation, energy, all of it.
		And transportation costs.
		And plus, you're going to have to pay a premium to get to the golden market.
		On the 30-front war, what they have that's working, because in the worst case for them, it's slowing us down to delay us to deny.
		And they're hammering.
		On the two most important parts of national security, President Trump as commander-in-chief, right, to essentially send the invader back to their home countries and, in addition, to make sure that the process of essentially stripping America of her industrial might and high-value-added jobs with it are thwarted.
		And let's be blunt.
		This is more than a speed bump.
		Peter Navarro is absolutely correct.
		The White House understood this.
		We're going to have Dan Epstein on later in the show from America First Law Legal, Stephen Miller's old group.
		He's going to explain it in the second hour and go through some technical details because the war room posse needs the receipts here because you're going to be the tip of the spear in a very nasty struggle this summer.
		I told you that this summer will define President Trump's legacy.
		We're within three weeks.
		Of the coming down, the 10-year anniversary coming down the golden escalator.
		And we're going to do all kind of specials about that.
		And we've got the big military parade and Flag Day and all that the day before.
		in President Trump's birthday, all of it, that weekend, Father's Day weekend.
		But as part of President Trump's coherent, integrated plan, economic plan,
		Navarro's piece in The Hill, and they just grilled him there on Bloomberg, actually starts to lay the case out of why, and you've got to make the case, because yes, it looks, the big, beautiful bill, it got some big, ugly in it in the first couple of years about deficits, as CBO scores it.
		And oh, by the way, there are very smart people that are coming to me, showing me analysis, saying, hey, maybe CBO is too optimistic.
		The administration takes the opposite opinion.
		That's great.
		You've got to back it up with something called the math.
		And they're doing it.
		That's what Peter Navarro was first yesterday.
		A big part of this is the rejuvenation of America as a manufacturing hegemon, a manufacturing superpower.
		And the concomitant either tariff revenues are coming in and or, as it's a supply-side tax cut, greater productivity and higher tax revenue from the existing tax structure, the tax structure they're putting in, particularly for corporations.
		So this is all an integrated whole.
		The left and the radical judges, and this gets back to Harvard, the law firms, all of it.
		Harvard, the elite Ivy League schools, and the public Ivys.
		The law firms and the courts are kind of part of the whole cloth of the globalists, of what they've done, the elite globalists, the rootless cosmopolitans that have Destroy this nation.
		And these judges are their tip of the spear.
		They have no political support.
		You see in all the polling, zero, no political support.
		The one thing is coming up time and time and time again, which I told you, we're in the age of economic populism.
		Why?
		The American citizen understands they're getting screwed.
		The whole thing's on their shoulder and they're getting screwed.
		You are the vanguard of understanding this.
		I don't know, over the last decade since the Tea Party, and now with President Trump and the MAGA movement going up, taking us 20 years in the future in a couple of years.
		Oh, by the way, the reason you see the convergence of all these crises, the constitutional crisis in the courts, the kinetic part of the Third World War, and now, not just the economic part and cutting spending and all that, but the center beating heart of this is the reshoring of high-value-added manufacturing jobs.
		The courts don't want that.
		The globalist elites don't want that.
		They want those manufacturing jobs to be with their partners overseas, and they're going to fight this like crazy.
		Every penny to Harvard.
		And Max Rose is a combat veteran Marine Democrat who represented Staten Island in Congress.
		He's lost to a Republican because it's pretty Republican.
		I think he's one of the guys that won in 18 in that big revolt.
		When really the political operation of President Trump did not focus that much on the House.
		They focused on other things.
		And Nancy Pelosi won 40 seats promising to impeach President Trump.
		And what did they do?
		Voila!
		They impeached President Trump and created a show called The War Room.
		Because we started covering that because nobody would talk about it.
		Nobody would touch it.
		So where are we now?
		This is why this Harvard thing is so absolutely important.
		Harvard, the law firms, and the judges are all part of one thing.
	This is the elitist, this is the finishing schools that they send to the law firms and the law firms are the hard linkage, the mechanical linkage between The capital markets, the private, the hedge funds, venture capital, and the political class here in Washington, D.C. And I would tell you, if you look at the revenues and people are shocked, good Lord, how do law firm have $9 billion in revenues?
	These law firms are changing and transforming into basically private equity groups.
	Their power is unlimited and President Trump's taking it to them.
	Of course, we had a ruling yesterday about that also.
	These judges, these radical neo-Marxist judges are not going to roll over, just like Harvard and these places are not going to roll over, just like these law firms are dusting themselves off and saying, no, no, no, no, we're going to fight.
	So the intensity and the urgency is about to increase manifold.
	There are alternatives.
	None of the alternatives are smooth and as kind of coordinated and really bringing jobs back and going after tariffs against Things that are the existential threat of the United States because the emergency boils down to many things.
	One, it's an economic crisis, but it's also fentanyl.
	They've killed a million people.
	This is much more brutal than the opium wars when the British decided that the Chinese didn't want any of their goods.
	The imperial court said, hey, yeah, we like your stuff, but it's nothing.
	You're nothing.
	You're a foreign devil.
	We're between man and we're the Middle Kingdom.
	We're not taking anything.
	How about that?
	Suck on that.
	Get out of here.
	And what'd they do?
	Oh, well, we think there's one thing you'll take, and that's opium.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	The Brits did it.
	I hate to say it.
	Pretty grimy.
	Not talked about.
	That's kind of the English version of the Cultural Revolution.
	Things are never discussed.
	Never discussed.
	They never talk about the Cultural Revolution in China because the CCP don't want to talk about that.
	And, you know, it's pretty hard to research the history of the opium wars.
	But that's what's happening here.
	It's a chemical warfare attack.
	They got biological warfare in the pandemic, 100%.
	And by the way, I missed the reparations.
	Where's the reparations discussion?
	Oh, yeah.
	We're not talking about that yet.
	You've got the chemical warfare.
	Look at your cities.
	Places in Ohio, they came and bring the factories because too many people on fentanyl.
	On these drugs, on opioids and sprinkled with fentanyl now.
	And guess what?
	The cartels are their partners.
	Hey, I'm all for interdiction down in Mexico.
	Either Mexico runs the Chinese Communist Party out there and the cartels will go in.
	Hell, the American people would support that a lot more going into Ukraine, sending the 101st Airborne, that brigade from Romania into Ukraine.
	Everything we did in Iraq and Afghanistan, this is an existential threat from an enemy.
	That enemy's the Chinese Communist Party.
	They're everywhere.
	And President Trump, oh, by the way, dropped a couple of bombs last night on the chips.
	You got NVIDIA and these guys saying, oh, well, you know, we're missing a $50 billion market.
	I don't care what market you're missing, dude.
	You hit your numbers.
	It was great.
	We're going to have here the coming apocalypse on white-collar jobs.
	In this audience, first off, if you're under 35, look in the mirror and repeat after me.
	I am screwed because the elites in this nation take advantage of me.
	Okay?
	Just repeat after me.
	I am screwed because the elites in this nation take advantage of me.
	"This is why you ain't got a job that pays anything.
	"This is why you don't own money." Because you ain't got a home.
	You're renting.
	It's like pajama boy.
	Remember that from Obama?
	I'm always going to rent and I'm going to be happy renting.
	Can you pass the cocoa?
	Can I have another cocoa?
	Can I have a cocoa with some mushrooms in it?
	Can I get energized in my cocoa?
	Remember Pajama Boy?
	That was lovely.
	You're going to build a nation around that, right?
	That's what they want to do.
	100%.
	Trump also dropped the bomb on Harvard.
	Hey, no students, no foreign students, no Chinese.
	I want to see it all.
	Lao Beijing has been tormented.
	This is not about Chinese students.
	It's about the process of the CCP using the students to go everywhere, including the weapons labs, take the positions from American students, and then to report back every month to the Chinese Communist Party.
	And, oh, by the way, go back and work in the technology companies.
	Hey, guess what?
	Educate them over there.
	In Hong Kong University, we will welcome all scholars of the world.
	Go for it, baby!
	You want to be indoctrinated and educated in Beijing University?
	Go for it.
	Want to go to Hong Kong University?
	Go for it.
	Europeans saying, well, we'll show America.
	Go!
	See how many sign up for that?
	This is the greatest education system because it's underwritten by taxpayers.
	Underwritten by taxpayers and there to rip taxpayers off of making sure the kids don't get jobs.
	President Trump, he's like outlaw Josie Wales.
	You know what he's saying?
	We're going to go down to Harvard and we're going to set things right.
	Short commercial break.
	We're getting into all of it today.
	Unbridled.
	Take your phone out right now.
	Capital Markets a little turbulent.
	We told you that was going to happen.
	Text Bannon, B-A-N-N-O-N.
	9-8-9-8-9-8.
	Get the ultimate guide, totally free, on investing in gold and precious metals in the age, not the era, the age of Trump.
	Back after short commercial.
unidentified		Here's your host, Stephen K. Van.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Real quickly before I bring Joe Allen and folks in.
		And this shows you in our history, there are strands in our history.
		That connect all the way through from the founding of this republic.
		This is why we spend so much time on the revolutionary generation and so much time on the founding generation.
		They're a little bit different.
		Okay?
		Not totally, but a little bit.
		But this fight about America, it goes all the way.
		When I say Andrew Jackson, and some of our brightest students in the war room will go, Andrew Jackson, please explain.
		So they had this issue with tariffs in Jackson's administration.
		Jackson was a hardcore populist and economic nationalist.
		He's the one that was not a fan of the Bank of the United States, not a fan of central banks, not a fan of New York City and bankers overall.
		Not a fan.
		They were right down below.
		They were one notch below.
		Because he had many confrontations with the Indian nations all before the Battle of New Orleans and most before the Battle of New Orleans.
		We became not just a national hero but an international hero because the Battle of New Orleans essentially ended the Revolutionary War.
		It was such a hammer blow to the British who were still causing problems.
		I asked Kurt Mills yesterday between things.
		I said, who's the number one enemy thing?
		He said MI6.
		It goes back a long way, right?
		Jackson had a ruling.
		In fact, the engine room, in the engine room, the Arizona department in the engine room, I'm not saying it's the best, but maybe the best.
		They're pretty damn good.
unidentified		They've already sent me a meme.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		The Court of International Trade.
		Interesting ruling now.
		Enforce it.
		This is what Jackson told the courts a couple of times.
		Because this was the forerunner to the Civil War.
		The landed aristocracy, particularly down in places like Charleston, in the folks that depended upon slave labor, there were more billionaires, equivalent of billionaires, there were more billionaires in Charleston in the local environs at the start of the Civil War than any place on Earth.
		The extraordinary wealth.
		This is why so many of the Scotch-Irish in Appalachia, particularly East Tennessee, which never really broke off from the Union.
		This is why Andrew Johnson, the running mate of Lincoln, the second term came from there.
		But the hard bit in Scotch-Irish, this is why my beloved Commonwealth of Virginia had a big old hunk taken out of it.
		Because those folks, that born fighting crowd up there in the hills and hollers of West by God, Virginia, said, no, we're not into the tidewater plantation owners.
		Not our deal.
		Jackson basically said, told the courts when they ruled against him, okay, you enforce it.
		We're going, okay, two things to make sure you keep in your mind, right?
		Number one, we're hurtling down towards, No tariff, no reorganization, no reshoring.
		So you've got that, you've got the courts on him being commander-in-chief and deporting.
		The 13 million illegal alien invaders.
		The courts are sitting there, and I say, hey, on the first, suspend the writ of habeas corpus.
		Suspend it.
		Do what Lincoln did.
		And Lincoln had a harder argument, ladies and gentlemen.
		I was raised in Richmond, Virginia.
		Born in Norfolk but raised in Richmond.
		Hey, when I was raised as a young kid, uh...
		But in looking at his greatness, he had a much, much harder—he was a warlord, no doubt about it, but he had a much harder legal argument because he couldn't say the states were in rebellion.
		Then he would basically—he couldn't—he could never admit that the Confederacy was a nation.
		He couldn't admit states were in rebellion.
		There were just elements in states that were in rebellion.
		This is this whole issue about the Emancipation Proclamation.
		Emancipation Proclamation is just an executive order.
		Like President Trump signs every day, you see those things?
		And the day a new administration comes in, they can throw them all out, which Biden did and which we did.
		We did twice.
		First, we threw all Obama's out.
		Then Biden wrote a bunch of them.
		We threw all those out.
		Or Biden threw all ours out.
		And then we threw all the Biden's out.
		That's just an executive order.
		That's what the Emancipation Proclamation is.
		Just an executive order.
		They knew it ran out.
		When Lincoln's term ran out.
		And Lincoln told the judge, hey, on writ of habeas corpus, hey, you try to enforce it, I'm going to put you in jail.
		Boom.
		Right between the eyes.
		Andrew Jackson said the exact same thing.
		Hey, enforce it.
		Big shot courts, enforce it.
		We're coming down to judicial supremacy, and this is why Harvard, which grooms all these radicals, Because that's what's become a festering sort of radicalism.
		Yes, it's got anti-Semites there and it's anti-Semitic and they don't burden them.
		But I don't think that should be pushed.
		It puts too much burden on the Jewish kids.
		It's far deeper than that.
		They hate the United States.
		They hate the Judeo-Christian West.
		And this is where they all come from.
		And go to Harvard Law School and go to Yale Law School.
		And then they go to the law firms, and these law firms are all radicalized, and then they kick a bunch of these guys into the judiciary.
unidentified		It's all a piece of a whole cloth.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		And President Trump, and it's in partnership, not with the United States of America, not with the citizens, they don't give a damn what you think out there in Arkansas or Nebraska or Arizona or Texas.
		They could care less about you.
		You're just fodder.
		And with AI, you're going to become a problem.
		And trust me, they're going to work as hard as possible to make sure that there ain't a lot of progeny around, okay?
		Because you're just an issue.
		They've got to get down to that 500 million carrying capacity that Jane Goodall, she let it slip.
		But I've heard smarter people than Jane Goodall have told me the exact same thing.
		The carrying capacity of the planet is about 500 million.
		Hmm, let me think.
		If I added up all the elites of the world around things, what did our number come to?
		500 million, thereabouts.
unidentified		Wow.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		There are no coincidences.
		You think that number is just randomly, they just pulled it out?
		They detest you.
		You're a problem.
		Look at Harvard.
		27 to 31% are foreign students and a bunch of those being paid for by you?
		And the ones from the Chinese Communist Party are signed a document.
		They've got to be an agent.
		We're the biggest supporters of Lao Ba Jing, overthrowing these dudes.
		But you don't do that by allowing them to get educated here and all their elites.
		Remember, in the Chinese Communist Party, this is how much they love China and the Chinese people.
		Number one priority is steal as much cash as possible from Lao Ba Jing.
		They make Congress and the people here look like pikers.
		Take as much as possible, and the first thing to do is get the hell out of China.
		Let's get it to Midtown Manhattan real estate.
		Let's get it into the West End of London.
		Let's be buying some of these stocks.
		Let's get this into these private equity funds.
		But get it out of here, because we have no earthly idea what's going to happen, and Lao Bajin can get a little surly.
		Maybe they'll overthrow us.
		Number one.
		Number two is get their kids out and get them educated in the West.
		President Trump dropping the hammer last night.
		And on the chips, and hey, guess what?
		The chips may be, and I've argued, you've got to watch it, the chips may be, the advanced chips may be the equivalent of oil in July and August of 1941.
		And we know what happened there.
		When we put the embargo on them, and they had some hardcore guys in FDR's administration, when they stopped all oil shipments and all fuel, In energy to Japan, they immediately, they had been planning on Pearl Harbor forever.
		They had the sneak attack in, what was it, 1905, that they always celebrate.
		Port Arthur, I think it was, a sneak attack on the Russians.
		Hell, they got, they got, they got, they got, during Pancho Villa, when Pershing went down to Pancho Villa on the expedition, I think in 1911.
		You had the Japanese down there then talking to Pancho Villa and these guys about giving them money and guns and arms and hey, we want to tie up the United States on the southern border.
		We want to infiltrate.
		These guys had a big league strategic plan and they were executing on it.
		As soon as it came from oil, guess what they did?
		Okay, let's kick in the plan on Tora, Tora, Tora.
		Let's go.
		We're going to take down Pearl Harbor and the foreign devils are gutless, soft, and they ain't going to fight.
		Hitler and Tojo made a couple of bad bets there.
		Greatest Generation responded to the call to arms.
		That's kind of where we are today.
		Jillian Tett, over the Financial Times of London, if we can put that up, the first time I've seen a piece like this in any major newspaper, my beloved Financial Times of London, she talks about, wait for it, geoeconomics.
		You heard that term before?
		She talks about the interrelationships of national security, trade, and finance.
		Hello!
		That's what we preach every day here on War Room.
		You, a working class audience, a middle class audience, you are so far up the learning curve on these people.
		So far up the learning curve.
		Remember, we had Westbury the other day who's fantastic.
		He goes back and starts talking about the balance sheet.
		You guys have heard that a million times.
		But he's shocked.
		They don't think anybody knows this stuff.
		You know it.
		That's why you're such a powerful political force.
		And that's why over the next, I don't know, 90 days, there's some tough decisions got to be made.
		On the spending, the big beautiful bill, the bond market, the, you know, there's a big article that Trump's going to lose his base over this Russia thing.
		Right?
		Putin, you know, still acting.
		Trying to take down militarily Ukraine.
		They're slugging it out using, guess what?
		Wait for it.
		Artificial intelligence coupled with drones.
		Drones, just a mechanism.
		Artificial intelligence, target acquisition and fire control solutions that they can't defend against.
	So this summer, the 15th of June, is the 10th year of President Trump coming down the golden escalator.
	That is a preamble.
	Ten years in the making is a preamble to what happens next.
	And what happens next anchors President Trump's historical significance.
	Yes, the first term, come from behind, beat Hillary, stop the globalists.
	First term, get the judges in, fight, fight, fight against these globalists.
	Then have the election stolen.
	Then not retreat, not give up, but come back like a hero.
	From ancient times, like mythology, to come back and say, I don't care what they do, but I'm going to come back and lead this nation back.
	And now to get back here and fight on all fronts.
	And, I might say, the one that we're probably making the least progress on is maybe the one that's most important for his legacy.
	and that is taking down the deep state because the deep state that this...
	They're the special forces of the deep state.
	And these folks on MSNBC and the New York Times, hey, enforce it.
	This whole thing of judicial supremacy, like where did this come from?
	You're not supreme.
	These radical judges, you're not over the executive branch.
	The president of the United States, the inherent powers of the executive branch, first of all, the stated powers in Article 2, chief executive officer of the government, commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and chief magistrate and chief law enforcement officer, those three, that's the office of the president.
	That's the office.
	And implied in that, particularly in the commander-in-chief role, right, as Lincoln argued, The inherent powers are enormous.
	And this is the fight we're going to have.
	The Harvard, the law firms, and these radical judges, they're all different aspects of the same thing.
	The special forces of the deep state and the globalist.
	To keep you in your place, and we ain't going to be kept in our place.
	We fought too long and hard to get back here.
	Short commercial break.
unidentified		We will fight till they're all gone.
		We rejoice when there's no more.
		Let's take down the CCP.
		Intelligence, key theme here in Davos.
andrew ross sorkin ▲ ● ▼		And first, right here on CNBC is Anthropics co-founder and CEO, Dario Modi.
unidentified		AGI has never been a well-defined term for me.
		I've always thought of it as a marketing term.
		But, you know, the way I think about it is at some point we're going to get to AI systems that are better than almost all humans at almost all tasks.
		The term I've used for it, an essay I recently wrote, is a country of geniuses in a data center trajectory.
andrew ross sorkin ▲ ● ▼		One of the things that you've done that I think is remarkable is you have effectively taught or maybe it's taught itself effectively how to use a computer meaning effectively it can go and use a mouse and find the things that it needs to go off and do.
unidentified		How game-changing is that?
		Yeah.
		So the way I think of computer use, which is what we call that capability, is I think of it as the first step towards a broader vision.
		And the idea is that that would be an agent that operates on your computer, on a computer, might operate at work.
		And you can give it tasks.
		You can say, you know, write this feature for this app.
		So over the next year, we're going to be gradually putting out the pieces of this vision.
		And along with that, you know, making sure it's safe and controllable and all of those things.
		We'll talk to ChatGPT over the course of your life.
		Someday, maybe if you want, it'll be listening to you throughout the day and sort of observing what you're doing.
		And it'll get to know you.
		And it'll become this...
		And Yoshua Bengio, when he spoke here, said that agentic AI is the thing to pay attention to.
		This is when everything could go wrong, as we give power to AI to go out onto the internet to do stuff.
		I mean, going out onto the internet was always, in the sci-fi stories, the moment where, you know, escape happened and potential, The fear is totally rational.
		The anxiety is totally rational.
		We all have a lot of it, too.
		But A, there will be tremendous upside.
		B, I really believe that society figures out, over time, with some big mistakes along the way, how to get technology right.
		And C, this is going to happen.
		This is like a discovery of fundamental physics that the world now knows about.
		And it's going to be part of our world.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		Is it O 'Neill that wrote technology in the West?
unidentified		I have to look at it.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		I think technology, when it first comes on, always looks for a human nature being what it is, folks.
		I think it all looks for a military application.
		Joe Allen, brother, we've got to talk about this coming.
		It's not coming.
		It's here now.
		The white-collar job apocalypse.
		We're going to get into that.
		Either listeners to the show or viewers of the show.
		Plus, if you're a little older, if you've got kids, this under 35 is about to get eviscerated.
		Write this down.
		And the accelerationists, what it's going to be upside for, besides maybe you getting to crib quicker for your job, is going to be the working class and the middle class in this country.
		The accelerationists are going to accrete all the value to them.
		Joe Allen, your thoughts and observations, brother.
joe allen ▲ ● ▼		Morning, Steve.
		Thank you for having me.
		You know, we talk a lot on the War Room about cultivating human agency.
		How do you give American people, especially working class people, how do you give them agency?
		Or better put, how do you encourage them to use their agency?
		Well, in these...
		How do you turn an AI that typically would need a human to constantly prompt it to act?
		How do you give an AI agency to go out and act in the world?
		You heard there...
		You heard OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman talking about the next wave of AI being agentic AI.
		AI as agent.
		An AI that can watch everything that you do on your computer.
		An AI that, as Sam Altman says, comes to know you, perhaps comes to know you better than you know yourself.
		And is able to actually go out onto the internet and act on your behalf.
		Most people would call that a dystopian nightmare.
		Most people would call that a recipe for creating mush-brained, But for these guys, it is first and foremost a way to monitor you.
		It is a way to control you.
		And ultimately, it's a way to replace you.
		They are billing it, and perhaps even in their own minds somewhere, they say this is a way to empower you or help you.
		But ultimately, you look back at the history of technology, especially digital technology and surveillance technology, it hasn't empowered anyone except for those who create it and deploy it.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		Okay, everybody.
		Remove number two pencil from the number two pencil holder.
		Take out notebook and write down the following.
		We're big in nomenclature.
		Agentic.
		Define agentic again.
		It's so genius.
		Define agentic again, sir.
joe allen ▲ ● ▼		Right now, in the kind of embryonic phase of this, agentic AI is a chatbot.
		Like, say, GPT, the model that OpenAI uses is operator, and it goes out onto the internet and just does things for you, like fills out forms or does your shopping.
		Maybe it can respond to emails without you being there.
		These sorts of things, right?
		It's supposed to be a convenience.
		Agentic AI is an AI that can act of its own accord.
		You send it out like a little genie to do your bidding for you.
		Now, ultimately, even the people creating this talk in terms of its danger, both an AI going rogue and doing what it wants to do and having the power to do so out on the internet, but maybe most importantly, I think the biggest danger is a human being creating something like this and sending it out to do things, even sending it out as you.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		Hang on.
		It's transferring your human agency to a digital avatar.
		That's why it's agentic.
		You're giving it your agency.
		And once it's got your agency, baby, it's off and running.
		Anyway, we'll come back.
		We've got Brian Costello.
		We've got Joe Allen.
		Dan Epstein is going to join us.
		One of the smartest brains out there about this tariff.
		We're doing it all.
		Today in the war room.
		Kind of a strategy session.
unidentified		I guess it's a information session before strategy session.
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		How's that sound?
steve bannon ▲ ● ▼		The tip of the tip of the spear is ready for action here in the war room.

▲