May 30, 2025 - Bannon's War Room
48:52
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
Whiplash, a federal appeals court ruling President Trump's tariffs can't stay in place for now. | |
| Temporarily pausing last night's ruling by the U.S. Court of International Trade that had blocked most of the president's sweeping tariffs and given the White House just 10 days to unwind them. | ||
| Three judges of the U.S. Court of International Trade disagreed and brazenly abused their judicial power to usurp the authority of President Trump to stop him from carrying out the mandate that the American people gave him. | ||
| President Trump relied on emergency powers outlined in a 1977 law to enact many of his tariffs, but the court said that use is impermissible, not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because that law does not allow it. | ||
| Small businesses in a dozen states had filed the lawsuits. | ||
| It's surreal. | ||
| Victor Schwartz is the lead plaintiff and the founder of VOS Selections, a small New York-based wine company. | ||
| The tariffs are a cash flow killer, particularly impactful for a small business. | ||
| This kind of uncertainty is terrible for business. | ||
| It's impossible. | ||
| You're just guessing. | ||
| The president still has other means of imposing tariffs on imported goods, and the White House says it will keep negotiating with other countries to reduce trade barriers on American products, despite the uncertainty. | ||
| Well, look, I think they don't know what to make of it, obviously. | ||
| They're not experts in our legal system. | ||
| They don't understand what laws the president can and cannot invoke when it comes to these tariffs. | ||
| What they've seen is, you know, on any given day, the bottom line seems to be the opposite. | ||
| It was the day before, whether because of legal challenges or because the president himself. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Just the other day, he said 50 percent tariffs on the European Union. | ||
| Whoops. | ||
| A day later. | ||
| No, let's let's not do that. | ||
| Even this ruling that got stayed today didn't cover certain tariffs on automobile. | ||
| I think it's very confusing for trading partners, and they don't know where it's going to end up. | ||
| And because you don't know where it's going to end up, like your wine dealer said in the interview earlier, you don't know what kind of plans to make as a business. | ||
| You don't know what kind of plans to make. | ||
| You don't know what kind of deals you need to make because you don't understand exactly where the president might decide his policies are going to be. | ||
| You don't know where to stand if the courts are going to allow him to do it. | ||
| Republican political and policy advisor Karl Rove warns in a column titled Tariffs May Cost the GOP in 2026, he argues that the administration's tariff messaging is a muddled mess, saying, quote, Unless reciprocity, the policy that if countries lower their tariffs will lower ours, unless that prevails, the president's chaotic trade talk will badly damage Republicans in the midterms. | ||
| Rove goes on to point out that in May 17th, Truth Social Post, President Trump demanded Walmart, eat the tariffs. | ||
| The president can blast all caps, posts, all he likes, but inevitably... | ||
| The 10-day deadline clock for the administration to stop collecting nearly all the tariffs is ticking, according to that court. | ||
| Is the president going to defy the court's order? | ||
| So, there's so much to unpack there, Elizabeth. | ||
| I'm standing here listening for about 10 minutes, like all these things going on. | ||
| I mean, let's start with Karl Rove. | ||
| Karl Rove is the guy who lost to Georgia's two Senate seats for us, and he's He hates the tariffs. | ||
| He hates Donald Trump. | ||
| Anything he says is totally discounted. | ||
| And he said the same stuff during the first term. | ||
| He said that consumers were going to eat the tariffs. | ||
| They did not. | ||
| Shame on you, Karl Rove. | ||
| When are you going to learn, sir? | ||
| With respect to the market, you're talking about, you seem to indicate that the markets were excited about this court ruling. | ||
| The fact of the matter is, the market's flat today on this ruling because nothing's really changed. | ||
| What Ed should have and could have added to his analysis was the fact that the court itself said that the Trump administration can accomplish the same things using different authorities under the law. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Bush or Obama or Biden, it's a bipartisan endeavor. | |
| However, this administration, the Trump administration, the first time to sort of vilify the judiciary in this way, to put out names, And talking about it in sort of incendiary terms that I know worries quite a few folks. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think the theme of the last two stories that we've been talking about are welcome to democracy. | |
| Welcome to our system. | ||
| It's not a judicial coup. | ||
| Our system, for as long as these short-membered people may or may not remember, has been a three-branch system of government in which other branches have a say. | ||
| And when you go back to the Elon Musk story, it's the same story. | ||
| He didn't just leave. | ||
| He's not just slipping out of Washington. | ||
| He was chased out of Washington by democracy. | ||
| By people saying no. | ||
| By people protesting so much around his cars and dealerships that he lost billions and billions of dollars. | ||
| By people raising their voices. | ||
| By people filing lawsuits. | ||
| And by the way, Donald Trump was saying, I think he wrote, he will always be with us. | ||
| That's something the Rev might say in a eulogy. | ||
| For someone. | ||
| So he will always be with us. | ||
| And I just want to say, we can tell the Elon story and this kind of disciplining by democracy as a story of someone leaving. | ||
| But there is pain in the wake of these tariffs, and there's pain in the wake of what Elon did. | ||
| He talked about bringing the wood chipper to USAID. | ||
| Brooke Nichols, Boston University professor, mathematician, figured out what is the effect of this. | ||
| They have a tracker. | ||
| 300,000 deaths. | ||
| According to a Boston University professor, because of the aid cuts so far, 200,000 of them children. | ||
| Okay, Vietnam War, y 'all remember that? | ||
| 60,000 U.S. service members died. | ||
| This is five times more deaths, according to the Boston University study, because of aid cuts since January of this year. | ||
| So Elon Musk is leaving, but he's also leaving a legacy. | ||
| But I think it's really important that people remember. | ||
| The courts work. | ||
| Joe and I have been having a 10-year conversation about our institution standing up or not. | ||
| The courts work still. | ||
| Not perfectly. | ||
| There's problems. | ||
| But the courts work. | ||
| Lawsuits work. | ||
| And pressure works. | ||
| And people raising their voice works. | ||
| And it's not just that Washington always wins. | ||
| I think the people always win. | ||
| Judiciary and Democrats filing lawsuits. | ||
| This has got to stop, by the way. | ||
| This weaponization of the judiciary to stop President Trump from doing what he promised the American people, this has got to stop. | ||
| The people of America have the lowest level of confidence. | ||
| And it's getting close to what they think about Congress. | ||
| And that's a low bar to hit. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You and your colleagues come out here and rail against rogue judges. | |
| See, who is this guy? | ||
| Tell me who you are, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm Andrew Feinberg. | |
| I work for the Independent. | ||
| Okay, so that is such a biased question. | ||
| That is not a journalist question. | ||
| That was like an op-ed, sir. | ||
| So I don't even respond to that. | ||
| Who else has got an intelligence? | ||
| Yes, ma'am. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, Britt, it seems highly inappropriate for the judiciary to wade in here when the Senate had the opportunity to override the president and did not. | |
| and we are striking the best deals for the American people, and anything that the courts do to get in the way both harms the American people in terms of trade and in terms of tariff revenue. | ||
| Personal income is up eight-tenths, up eight-tenths of a percent. | ||
| That is almost triple the expectations, and it underscores. | ||
| We could talk about a lot of issues, but when you look at income for the first four months of the year, they're powerful numbers, Joe. | ||
| Up six-tenths in January, up seven-tenths in February, up a half and one percent last month, up eight-tenths this month. | ||
| This is a great four-month start to any year. | ||
| Now, with the income shooting up, and by the way, 8 tenths is the strongest income month-over-month jump since May of 21, when it was 1.9. | ||
|
unidentified
|
*Dramatic music* | |
| This is the primal scream of a dying regime. | ||
| Pray for our enemies. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Because we're going medieval on these people. | |
| I got a free shot on 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. | ||
| And where do people like that go to share the big line? | ||
|
unidentified
|
MAGA Media. | |
| I wish in my soul, I wish that any of these people had a conscience. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Ask yourself, what is my task and what is my purpose? | |
| If that answer is to save my country, this country will be saved. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Vann. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Vann. | ||
| It's Friday, 30 May, Yerville, 2025. | ||
| Magnificent cold open right there. | ||
| You see the turmoil that President Trump's policies were in. | ||
| Let's just go back. | ||
| You got three big lines of work. | ||
| Number one is to stop the kinetic part of the Third World War, all the way in that arc of instability from Kursk to Kiev, down through the Mediterranean, Israel, Gaza, all the way to Persia, the Red Sea, all of it, President Trump. | ||
| Trying to do the heavy lift there, but this is tied to trade. | ||
| Also, you've got the deportations, the courts right now, and this is important about tariffs. | ||
| Yesterday, so what they've done is challenged his Article II powers as commander-in-chief. | ||
| Remember, on the deportations back to Venezuela and Central America, he's declared an emergency, a national emergency, on an invasion. | ||
| And he says he can deport all these, including starting with the bad hombres. | ||
| On trade, what they did is said we have a national emergency because of one million fentanyl deaths in human trafficking. | ||
| The subheading was about actual trade itself and the shipping of jobs. | ||
| That's what the court did yesterday. | ||
| The court took the entire argument on the emergency of why he's going after Canada, Mexico, and the Chinese Communist Party and actually just dismissed it. | ||
| Completely dismissed it as The courts are trying to dismiss about the invasion. | ||
| Remember, they had a leaked national intelligence estimate that Tulsi Gabbard caught after it was already leaked by the deep state people on her staff, and she fired those folks on the staff. | ||
| Brennan went nuts. | ||
| But you see this continuing constitutional crisis we're in. | ||
| It's not about to come. | ||
| It's here. | ||
| It's got to be rectified by the end of June before the Supreme Court goes home. | ||
| We cannot have 100 days in the summer until they come back in October. | ||
| Unless this is dealt with. | ||
| And D.C. Drano, you know, Rogan O 'Hanley is going to join with us later in the show as Mike Davis is. | ||
| I think Mike's calling in from Israel. | ||
| He's on a trip over there. | ||
| And about President Trump literally putting a shot across the bow of Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society. | ||
| People should understand this thing is ramping up. | ||
| And what President Trump is doing and his team is doing across the board is getting these recalcitrant Republican globalists. | ||
| The Karl Rove's of the world and the Leonard Leos of the world and giving them a head slap and saying either get with the program or you're going to get off the program. | ||
| This is why Peter Navarro at the sticks yesterday is going off on Karl Rove, of course, in the globalist controlled opposition Wall Street Journal. | ||
| Once again, stunningly, Karl Rove is out there, you know, whining about the midterms, whining about the tariffs, whining about all of it, President Trump's massive effort. | ||
| To bring high-value-added manufacturing jobs back to the United States. | ||
| Folks should understand two things here. | ||
| We told you this was going to be big, and it's big. | ||
| Go back to the 7th, 8th, and 9th of May. | ||
| The 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe Day from the Russian perspective. | ||
| You had Lula in Brazil, you had Xi, and you had Putin all together. | ||
| This goes back to 2019 when President Trump and Lighthizer And Jameson Greer and Peter Navarre and others. | ||
| Miller and myself worked for two years to get a trade deal that was totally inextricably linked, the Chinese Communist Party, to the global economy. | ||
| After two years of negotiation, after they had the One Belt and One Road Conference in Shanghai with Putin, the first one they had, they tore it up and spit in our face. | ||
| And then, voila, 90 days later at the military games in Wuhan, people started getting sick. | ||
| President Trump was on a roll with a 3%. | ||
| Growth rate in his economy, no inflation, interest rates near all-time lows. | ||
| This is what's happened here. | ||
| If you notice the Russian assault on Ukraine, and we're all for ending this war immediately, we didn't want to have it begin in the first place. | ||
| Derek Calcitrance at the table on a rapprochement in Ukraine, and now the Chinese Communist Party told Besant, eh, I don't know, it's going to be a while before we meet. | ||
| Part of that is... | ||
| They're going to chase them out of every university in the country. | ||
| Report today, 350,000 Chinese students in engineering schools, artificial intelligence, all of it. | ||
| 800 Americans in China, mostly on languages and humanities. | ||
| They all got to go and they got to be replaced by American students. | ||
| Short commercial break. | ||
| We're going to get down to it today. | ||
| Global economics, capital markets, all of it. | ||
| next. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I got American faith in America's heart. | |
| Okay, one big aspect here that people should keep in mind, I've got Eric Tietzel from Center for Renewing America. | ||
| Tietzel, Center for Renewing America is kind of like Fort Apache, right? | ||
| All the colonels and field officers all went to the administration. | ||
| And we got guys holding the floor. | ||
| I'm just kidding, Tito, you're a rock star. | ||
| But I am about to beat you up here on the pocket decisions. | ||
| Your new greatest idea. | ||
| I'm not saying you bait and switch me, but we'll get to that in a second. | ||
| Hey, your thoughts. | ||
| You guys have been at the forefront as public intellectuals with the Project 2025 guys, the America First Policy Institute, America First Law. | ||
| All of it, of working through the president's agenda. | ||
| Walk me through what's happened in the last 48 hours both on the judicial insurrection, particularly with the tariffs now, and they're just dismissing the national security aspect of this and going back to the economics, which is not the way to look at it. | ||
| I would love to look at it that way. | ||
| I think you make a compelling argument. | ||
| If you have to go to – It'll take you three years. | ||
| If you go to Congress, it'll take you 10 years. | ||
| So give me your thoughts on that. | ||
| Put that in perspective for folks. | ||
| Yeah, it's all part of a bigger problem, which is – These guys, as it showed in the clip that you started the show with today, they think they're a co-equal third branch of government and that they have this awesome responsibility to constrain the executive branch whenever they think it's gotten out of control. | ||
| That's not what the Constitution says. | ||
| In fact, what the Constitution says is that Congress gets to create courts to do some very specific things. | ||
| Court that Congress created to deal with trade can stop the president from doing what is clearly within his executive power to do. | ||
| It was a relief to see that the circuit courts stepped in quite quickly to remedy yet another example of judicial overreach. | ||
| But we've got a huge problem on our hands. | ||
| It's a systemic problem, and it's a constitutional crisis, and we've got to get it figured out. | ||
| You agree. | ||
| We're in a constitutional crisis right now. | ||
| It's not about to come. | ||
| We're in the middle of it right now, and it's got to get resolved. | ||
| The Article II powers have got to be – his powers as commander-in-chief. | ||
| And listen, this is why we got Rogan on handling it on later. | ||
| We're the biggest advocates of just do what Lincoln did, start suspending the writ of habeas corpus, put them on an aircraft, and get them the hell out of here. | ||
| You're going to have to play hardball because these courts are – the courts – I think we have 180 federal court. | ||
| He's got intrusions into President Trump's unified executive theory of Article 2, which he's chief executive officer, so he can do it on the budget. | ||
| If OMB is telling him the program is already done or it's not hitting it, he can impound the money or he can let people go. | ||
| As commander-in-chief, he's got the inherent powers that Lincoln had. | ||
| You have massive inherent powers as commander-in-chief, and no court can step in between him and his commander-in-chief. | ||
| And number three is chief magistrate and chief law enforcement officer. | ||
| We just had the House. | ||
| We had the big, beautiful bill. | ||
| We advocated taking of the $10 billion federal budget for the courts. | ||
| Let's lop two off. | ||
| I think Russ was all over that. | ||
| What happened to us there? | ||
| We've let... | ||
| Nobody's been called up to be deposed publicly. | ||
| No impeachment effort's been moved. | ||
| We haven't cut off any money. | ||
| We haven't gone in and just started downsizing these districts, have we, sir? | ||
| Has the Hill taken any action to back up President Trump here? | ||
| On judges, there's been a lot of conversation. | ||
| Some of these guys understand this issue, and they're taking it really seriously. | ||
| There have been some really good ideas proposed, things like banning district court shopping, limiting the jurisdiction of these decisions to the district where the decision happens. | ||
| Multiple judge panels, instead of letting one rogue liberal justice from San Francisco determine the public policy of the United States. | ||
| There's all kinds of ideas out there. | ||
| The question is implementation. | ||
| You're not going to be able to pass any of these bills because you're going to need 60 votes in the Senate, and obviously the Democratic Party is not going to get on the other side of the one branch of government that has successfully done their bidding. | ||
| They certainly can't get it done, and they're relying on judges. | ||
| So this is going to have to happen either through the appropriations process as you laid out. | ||
| or because the president and his team step up and do exactly what President Lincoln did. | ||
| By the way, there's a huge difference between what President Lincoln did There's executive overreach, where you step outside the bounds of what the Constitution says the president is allowed to do. | ||
| That's what Barack Obama was talking about. | ||
| What we're talking about is a renewal to the constitutional powers that are explicitly laid out by the founders, and that includes his powers as commander-in-chief and all the other realms that you described, Steve. | ||
| Eric, if you buy into the fact that we're in a constitutional crisis right now, this has to be worked out. | ||
| Neither Roberts takes care of it or we've advocated, and I think President Trump's going to go full Andrew Jackson on you or full Abraham Lincoln. | ||
| But we're not to that point yet. | ||
| In a crisis, why is the House not doing, I mean, waiting for the appropriations process? | ||
| They're taking two weeks off now. | ||
| Why are they not all over this? | ||
| This is an emergency, and the legislative branch has got to step up here, sir. | ||
| Yeah, you're not wrong. | ||
| We would love to see more action on this. | ||
| It is time. | ||
| It is a crisis. | ||
| Congress is a lagging indicator. | ||
| They always have been, and they probably always will be. | ||
| The American people need to be demanding of their representatives to get in there and fight for these changes that need to happen. | ||
| Not for purely partisan political reasons, but because it is truly a constitutional crisis that affects all Americans of all political stripes. | ||
| This is not how we were meant to operate. | ||
| T, so let's go back to his Article 2 powers. | ||
| Why is the president just not impounding certain of this money, right? | ||
| I realize Russ and you guys are coming out with the first rescissions package next week. | ||
| It's $2 billion for PBS and NPR and another $7 billion of sundry cuts. | ||
| And that's, I understand, is symbolic and you want to get it through. | ||
| Why are we screwing around with rescissions? | ||
| These people on the Hill are completely and totally incompetent. | ||
| Why are we dealing with these guys? | ||
| The process is too slow. | ||
| They take too many days off. | ||
| They're not around. | ||
| There's no urgency. | ||
| There's no focus. | ||
| And quite frankly, there's not a lot of three-digit IQs up there. | ||
| We're not bringing our best. | ||
| So why are we doing this? | ||
| And I understand you've got now this theory, CRAs are back, of pocket rescissions, which will come later in the year. | ||
| Why don't we just step up to the plate? | ||
| And this is another thing. | ||
| Put it up in the court's face. | ||
| Let's impound this money and dare Roberts and dare these courts to try to challenge Trump once again on what's clearly laid out as his article to power, sir. | ||
| One of the things I love about you, Steve, is that you will run headfirst into a brick wall, and sometimes that's the right thing to do. | ||
| In this case, the strategy around appropriations and reinvigorating the Article II powers of the president when it comes to government spending require a slightly more strategic approach. | ||
| And it's going to start with this rescissions package, which is admittedly relatively small. | ||
| $9.4 billion, the USAID money. | ||
| You've got money for NPR and PBS and those kinds of things, too. | ||
| This is kind of a trial balloon. | ||
| It's an opportunity for Congress to step up to the plate and do what so many of them have said they wanted to do, which was cut woke, wasteful, and weaponized government spending. | ||
| Here you go. | ||
| Here's $9 billion. | ||
| Here's the thing. | ||
| If they fail to do it, you can't ever rescind that money in a future package during this fiscal year. | ||
| It's one and done. | ||
| So they need to take this seriously. | ||
| If they fail to act, that's it. | ||
| And that's an explanation of why OMB and the president did not make the package bigger. | ||
| So they need to show that they are capable of doing this. | ||
| And if my entire lifetime is any evidence, they may not be capable of cutting government spending. | ||
| So we don't want to waste a whole bunch of ammunition on something that's doomed to fail. | ||
| There's a step-by-step process in place. | ||
| You've put NPR and PBS in there for a billion each. | ||
| To kind of say, hey, if you don't vote for this, you're going to be a pariah back in your district, essentially, because you can't come back and do it again? | ||
| 100%. | ||
| If you can't cut funding for NPR, how can we expect you to cut funding that might actually be hard to cut and harder to justify? | ||
| This is low-hanging fruit, and we'll see how it goes. | ||
| And when is that test going to take place? | ||
| Package is coming over early next week. | ||
| He's going to bring it next week? | ||
| Okay, fine. | ||
| And they have 45 days to act. | ||
| So that's a key part of this. | ||
| Congress gets 45 days. | ||
| House and Senate both need to pass this thing. | ||
| They only need 50 votes. | ||
| It's a pure majority on the Senate side. | ||
| They don't have to pass all of it. | ||
| They can pick and choose from the list of budget authorities that the president is sending over. | ||
| But within that 45-day window, they need to make a decision. | ||
| If the 45 days passes and the House and Senate have not both passed these rescissions, the money It continues to be spent. | ||
| It is obligated. | ||
| So it's really important that they get it done. | ||
| Don't bury the lead. | ||
| I just hear you say $400 billion of Doge cards because let me be blunt. | ||
| Here's why Doge hurt the process and we're the biggest believers you've got to deconstruct the administrative state because it gave the political class up on Capitol Hill the same people. | ||
| That Russ' vote has to make a package of only $9 billion to make it symbolic to see if he's got the votes because they're so cowardly. | ||
| He's got to put NPR and PBS in there and dare him to vote against it because they're so cowardly about this. | ||
| At first it was $165 billion. | ||
| Russ said, and Elon kind of jumped on it, and the thing went from $2 trillion to $1 trillion to $165 billion. | ||
| You're $400 billion. | ||
| Did I hear you say that, $400 billion? | ||
| That's a number I've seen reported. | ||
| I don't know exactly what Elon would tell you if he had his spreadsheets in front of you, but I thought I had seen a number in excess of $400 billion that Doge had identified as being potential for good cuts. | ||
| Hang on for a second. | ||
| I want to bifurcate programmatic versus waste, fraud, and abuse. | ||
| The problem is they promised a trillion and let these guys off the hook. | ||
| That's where we got no real cuts. | ||
| Coming in the big, beautiful bill. | ||
| It's going to be in appropriations, but it's $160 billion. | ||
| Mandatory cuts, Russ got in, bend the arc in the fifth year. | ||
| But we've got a bond vigilante problem now. | ||
| They're going to raise the debt ceiling to $4 trillion, and it's going to be two weeks after the midterm elections. | ||
| We're going to hit that in our calculation in August of 2026, before the midterms. | ||
| Short break. | ||
| Eric Tietzel from Fort Apache. | ||
| All next in the War Room. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Modern day for the war. | |
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Mann. | ||
| Okay, since Tietzel says that I run into brick walls in my head, and there's some truth there. | ||
| Tietzel, on impoundments versus the rescissions, in the pocket rescissions. | ||
| President Trump, this constitutional crisis, have you so brilliantly outlined? | ||
| is a direct challenge to his Article II powers. | ||
| The big thing on Article II powers right now is on his being the commander-in-chief and trying to stop, one, an invasion and to... | ||
| Number two is to stop fentanyl and the human trafficking and use the basically entrance into the golden, you know, through the golden door on tariffs. | ||
| Okay, so that's two parts of the same point. | ||
| However, the other Article 2 power of being chief executive, his ability to work with OMB and figure out programmatically. | ||
| Right, programmatically, exactly what's going on and make a conscious decision as chief executive and the concomitant decision of maybe letting people go is another Article 2 power. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That's right. | |
| Why don't you just go and pound it right now? | ||
| Just let's lance the boil. | ||
| I just don't – and I realize – and Russ has done a great job on these mandatory cuts. | ||
| It's brilliant, first time it's ever happened. | ||
| But we're having – it's kind of nuanced. | ||
| Right? | ||
| Where people inside the apparatus kind of get it, but nobody else, including the capital markets, don't understand it. | ||
| Don't you think there's an argument to just get Capitol Hill? | ||
| Because Lindsey Graham and these guys, they're the ones demanding you come back up so it looks like they've done something. | ||
| Right, for the rescissions. | ||
| But right now, you're sitting there with a little $9 billion package and you're kind of, who's going to whip this? | ||
| How are we going to get it done? | ||
| Why don't you say screw them and pound the money and dare them to take you to court? | ||
| And then dare them, if they rule against you, then dare them to stop Trump, to force Trump to spend the money. | ||
| Because he won't spend the money. | ||
| He will never tell Scott Besson to, hey, go ahead and send the check. | ||
| He won't do that. | ||
| And if you're going to go full Andrew Jackson, hey, you can make all the rulings you want, go enforce them. | ||
| I love it. | ||
| I love the ferocity. | ||
| And there's a part of me that says, hell yeah, let's do that. | ||
| It's time to go. | ||
| It's obviously not my decision to make. | ||
| This is a decision the president has to make. | ||
| I keep thinking about Abraham Lincoln and your love of history, Steve, you know this. | ||
| The Emancipation Proclamation did not free all the slaves. | ||
| Lincoln could have gone further. | ||
| In fact, Frederick Douglass and the other abolitionists, they said, this guy's a squish. | ||
| He didn't even bother to free all the slaves. | ||
| He's another John Tyler. | ||
| In fact, Lincoln was trying to be strategic and say, if I free all of the slaves, I'm going to have a real political problem on my hand. | ||
| But if I only free the slaves in the states that rebelled against the Union, I'm on stronger ground to eventually win this war and get America to the place where it needs to be in fulfillment of its full promise, right? | ||
| So what we're talking about here is statesmanship. | ||
| It's looking at the situation on the ground and saying, we could go that route, and I think we know what the consequences are going to be if we do. | ||
| Or we could take this route, and it's a little slower, and it doesn't go as far as fast as we would all like for it to go. | ||
| But it has a much higher chance of ultimately succeeding. | ||
| So when it comes to impoundment, you're talking about declaring a federal law that's been on the books for 50 years unconstitutional and asking John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh to join the conservatives to make that ruling. | ||
| That's a hard lift. | ||
| We already have seen so many times we've been disappointed by the so-called conservative court. | ||
| So what you want to do to actually win that landmark case someday is have the ideal fact pattern in place to create a new precedent that does revive the president's powers of empowerment fully. | ||
| And he's on the firmest ground to do that in situations like being the commander-in-chief. | ||
| So that's why you don't do one fell swoop. | ||
| It may not be the right call, and I wholeheartedly agree with you. | ||
| This is both a constitutional crisis and a financial one. | ||
| This is the strategy they've chosen to deploy, and we'll see how it works out. | ||
| Remember, Lincoln didn't – the reason Frederick Douglass was upset, in areas he had control called states that were still in the Union, he didn't free any slaves. | ||
| In areas that he had no control because they were still states, he never agreed that the Confederacy was a nation. | ||
| He never agreed that the states were in rebellion. | ||
| Certain elements in those states were in rebellion. | ||
| That was his legal definition. | ||
| He freed those with an executive order. | ||
| It's just an executive order. | ||
| Trump writes these executive orders. | ||
| The Emancipation Proclamation is an executive order. | ||
| It was going to run out. | ||
| That's why he made such a big deal to get legislation. | ||
| However, his key selling point to his cabinet and to others was that when he did the Emancipation Proclamation after Antietam, or Sharpsburg as we call it in the South, and then did it in January of 1863, I think. | ||
| He told his cabinet. | ||
| He gave the American people two years to chew it over, or 18 months to chew it over, and they elected him in a landslide. | ||
| That was his justification. | ||
| And to the courts, the people had plenty of time to mull this over, and they sent me back here in a landslide. | ||
| Trump is the same argument. | ||
| He's been up front from the beginning of exactly what he was going to do. | ||
| There's no hide the football. | ||
| And he can sit there and go, hey, I gave the people actually four years, but they had everything I was going to do on deportations, everything I was going to do on fentanyl and human trafficking, everything I was going to do on tariffs, everything I was going to do about cutting spending, and everything I was going to do to reinforce the Article II powers of the presidency. | ||
| And he gave the country two years to go through that. | ||
| And MSNBC every night eviscerated him, and he won the popular vote. | ||
| Over 300, what, 15 electoral votes? | ||
| It's the same argument as Lincoln. | ||
| So why not? | ||
| I love – and by the way, I understand strategically and what you're doing. | ||
| I'm just saying you're going to have a bond market revolt this summer, and you're going to have to – and Trump's going to have to sit there and go, screw it. | ||
| I'm going to impound the money. | ||
| So anyway, reasonable men can disagree. | ||
| It may take that. | ||
| No. | ||
| It may take a situation like that. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Tietzel, where do people go now that you're manning Fort Apache? | ||
| How many guys left at CRA, by the way? | ||
| You know, we're building back up. | ||
| We've got 20 full-time staff again now. | ||
| Wow, good, good. | ||
| You've got Kingsley over at Defense. | ||
| You've got Russ at OMB. | ||
| You've got Payaletta over at OMB. | ||
| You've got people everywhere who've just done a great job. | ||
| You've got Jeff Clark. | ||
| You've got nothing but hitters there. | ||
| It's incredible. | ||
| Where do people go to get more knowledge of CRA? | ||
| You guys do a great job. | ||
| And your personal social media. | ||
| Yeah, americarenewing.com is the place to find our work. | ||
| You can learn more about rescissions and pocket rescissions over there. | ||
| You can find us online, America Renewal Center. | ||
| And I'm at Eric Tietzel. | ||
| Thanks, Steve. | ||
| I really appreciate it. | ||
| Yeah, folks, go find out. | ||
| The rescissions, Russ and the team are coming forward with a rescission in the next two weeks. | ||
| Number one, you've got to understand the details of that. | ||
| And you should understand, it's kind of breaking news on Natalie's. | ||
| Natalie was anchoring the other night when the CRA guys came on and kind of broke the news about pocket rescission. | ||
| That's going to be big. | ||
| It's probably going to be the path they're going to go down because they want the Hill to be involved here. | ||
| But anyway, Tietzel, great work. | ||
| I'll eventually convince you. | ||
| That impoundments are the way to go. | ||
| But that's an argument for a different day, brother. | ||
| Twist my arm, man. | ||
| Thanks, Steve. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Artificial intelligence. | ||
| The apocalypse. | ||
| The white-collar apocalypse. | ||
| More layoffs are coming as they announce earnings. | ||
| And these are big. | ||
| McKinsey, 10% of the workforce. | ||
| These are consultants. | ||
| These are not back-office grundoons. | ||
| The efficiency model of artificial intelligence versus the productivity model is what Wall Street's buying into. | ||
| And every one of these companies, you're starting to see significant, significant mid-management and below layoffs, all directed to artificial intelligence. | ||
| We got Joe Allen. | ||
| Axios actually had a Is that doable? | ||
| 13. Okay. | ||
| We got a little cold open for Joe Allen, a couple of them. | ||
| Axios this morning had an amazing piece on fusion of artificial intelligence companies with government aspect, particularly government funding. | ||
| Jim Vanderhay was on Morning Joe. | ||
| Let's see that, and I'll bring in Joe Allen. | ||
|
unidentified
|
For sure. | |
| And it defeated Musk in this task. | ||
| That said, you've got to understand, Elon, in that he takes the long view. | ||
| And certainly in the short term, he didn't accomplish what he wanted to. | ||
| But remember what his companies do, and remember his relationship with the president, and remember how much data they were able to suck up when they went into all these different agencies to better understand how the federal government works. | ||
| And now watch. | ||
| Does he start to sell rockets, satellites, autonomous technology, all of the products that his five or six companies are producing, does the government end up being a massive And that is when I think about the fusing. | ||
| I think people aren't paying enough attention to how much Silicon Valley and Washington, that were really separate for most of our lifetimes, have really fused into one kind of superstructure. | ||
| And it's very, very codependent. | ||
| These big companies, it's not just Musk's companies, it's Microsoft, it's Google, it's OpenAI. | ||
| You were kind of on a roll. | ||
| I don't know what planet you're living on, dude. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What are you talking about? | |
| The oligarchs are a total 1,000% creation of progressive Democrats. | ||
| The Obama administration laid out, when Obama got the Facebook pitch in that San Francisco airport, the way to take down Hillary Clinton in the primary, that was the zuck that gave him the pitch. | ||
| Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Google, I can go on five or six of it. | ||
| Complete oligarchs. | ||
| No antitrust, no FTC, no FCC, nothing. | ||
| For the Obama administration, then in Trump, we started antitrust. | ||
| Remember, this is where we initiated the lawsuit by the FTC to break up Facebook, that they're in federal court right now. | ||
| The Biden administration was even worse. | ||
| They had Lena Kahn, the great Lena Kahn. | ||
| And didn't let her do anything. | ||
| What she did in those four years was toughen the lawsuit against the FTC that President Trump filed. | ||
| So now they're in federal court. | ||
| Zuckerberg went to the White House, what, ten times to beg President Trump to basically call off the dogs? | ||
| And they're not calling off the dogs. | ||
| In the Justice Department right now, with Gail Slater and the team Omid Asari and the team over there, it's the strongest antitrust team we've ever had. | ||
| You look at the FTC, Andrew Ferguson. | ||
| Directly in the lineage of Lena Kahn. | ||
| You look at the FCC Davis. | ||
| We've got Google and federal court in Northern Virginia and federal court in Washington, D.C. One to take down their monopoly on the search engine. | ||
| The other take the monopoly on their advertising, of which they're breaking people. | ||
| People know this open secret. | ||
| President Trump, the fusion of big tech and big government has been a progressive Democrat. | ||
| All the tech bros, their road to Damascus. | ||
| It was 10 o 'clock p.m. Eastern Standard Time on the 5th of November of 2024, when President Trump was named the 47th president of the United States. | ||
| All of these guys, except for Elon, that had kind of gotten old-time religion when he bought Twitter and saw the math of the populist nationalist revolt in these states, and he wrote a $250 million check to back his play. | ||
| It would have been very tough to win without that. | ||
| Everybody acknowledges that, particularly here at the War Room. | ||
| But for Jim Vander Heide to say there's some fusion now between artificial – now, as a neo-Brandeisian, and that means we're absolutely adamantly opposed to the Chicago school kind of about the consumer. | ||
| You have to separate and crush private power with state power. | ||
| The business model we have in this country right now is very close to the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| State capitalism. | ||
| Right? | ||
| Merge with regulatory. | ||
| It's regulatory merger or elite capture. | ||
| That's exactly what's happened in this country. | ||
| That's why it has to be broken up. | ||
| And who is better than Trump? | ||
| He's got massive fines on Apple. | ||
| He just told Apple, you're not going to make your stuff in India. | ||
| You're coming home. | ||
| Right? | ||
| He's got Google in federal court. | ||
| He's got Facebook in federal court. | ||
| We won't even take Amazon and wait for it, Walmart. | ||
| Walmart should be broken up. | ||
| They all should be broken up. | ||
| The concentration of power in big pharma, big media, big tech, big medicine, big agriculture is choking this country. | ||
| It's choking entrepreneurs. | ||
| Vander Haidt, like what planet are you on, brother? | ||
| Short commercial break. | ||
| Joe Allen joins us on the other side. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Vann. | |
| Thank you. | ||
| I'm going to make a prediction here that we're not really going to make a lot of progress. | ||
| What the Chinese just said the other day, Besson admitted, that they're kind of like, you know, we've got to really rethink, we've got to think this trade thing. | ||
| Part of it is that we've called them out on sending all the 350,000 students home. | ||
| We're not going to train them anymore. | ||
| We're sending them back. | ||
| Next, you're going to see the visas stop for heaven, and they're going to get them all out of the weapons labs and the national labs. | ||
| You've got to. | ||
| If you're a Chinese national, as strong as we are in support of Lao Beijing, if you're a Chinese national, you sign that deal with the CCP that has you have to provide information. | ||
| It doesn't hack it. | ||
| Everybody's got to go. | ||
| I hate to be a maximalist, but I'll be a maximalist. | ||
| You've got to go. | ||
| Nothing's going to really budge until after the Rio reset. | ||
| You saw what happened in Moscow when Putin, Lula, and Brazil, and Xi were together. | ||
| Everything's changed since then. | ||
| The attitude of Putin on the Ukraine war and the Russian rapprochement, what's happened in the trade deal since then, and the kind of arrogance of the CCP, they're waiting for Rio. | ||
| How do you find out about it? | ||
| Birchgold.com slash bandit, the end of the dollar empire. | ||
| Four years we've worked. | ||
| We've put out seven free installments. | ||
| If you want to understand this like nobody's business is now taught. | ||
| Certain undergraduate colleges in the finance course, why it's accessible. | ||
| You understand debt, deficit, all of it. | ||
| Most importantly, you understand the dollar as the prime reserve currency and what that means and why gold is a hedge. | ||
| Ain't the price of gold, although the price of gold is up, I don't know, 3x, 3.5x since we first partnered with Birch Gold. | ||
| That's not the point. | ||
| The point is, why is it a hedge? | ||
| Because a lot more turbulence is coming and gold has been a hedge for 5,000 years of mankind's recorded history. | ||
| Why is that? | ||
| It's the process, not the price. | ||
| You can learn it all by going to birchgold.com slash bandit. | ||
| End of the dollar empire. | ||
| Joe Allen. | ||
| Oh, by the way, home title lock. | ||
| 90% of your net worth is tied up in your home if you're lucky enough to have one. | ||
| If you're under 35, you're probably not so lucky. | ||
| Post-35, that little piece of paper, that title, is the only claim you have to that real asset you call a house, okay? | ||
| 89% of your net worth is titled. | ||
| That's just the math. | ||
| Artificial intelligence, cyber attacks, a wayward lawyer or accountant, or maybe even a family member. | ||
| There's so many ways on the rudimentary system we have for titles. | ||
| For somebody to get into it. | ||
| Home Title Lock. | ||
| $1 million triple lock protection. | ||
| 24-7 coverage. | ||
| In the middle of the night, anything happens. | ||
| Boom. | ||
| Alert. | ||
| But most importantly, $1 million restoration process with lawyers to make sure that you get your title back and some hard-money lender doesn't have a second on your home that's got you off the ramparts in the war room fighting for MAGA. | ||
| HomeTitleLock.com. | ||
| Promo code Steve. | ||
| We got a cold open with... | ||
| Let's do it. | ||
| I'm going to bring Joe in. | ||
| We're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| Top of the hour. | ||
| We're going to Korea. | ||
| We've got Jane Zirk. | ||
| We're going to talk about Bernie Carrick, one of the greats, the all-time greats, left us last night. | ||
| We're going to talk about Bernie Carrick. | ||
| We've got a lot to go through. | ||
| Let's go ahead and play the Artificial Intelligence cold open. | ||
|
unidentified
|
A big shout-out to the War Room Posse. | |
| It's a pleasure to be here and engage in this conversation. | ||
| Let's make it memorable. | ||
| Let's do it. | ||
| I'm here with Amica, a robot produced by Engineered Arts. | ||
| What is transhumanism? | ||
| Transhumanism is like a tech-infused philosophical smoothie. | ||
| It blends human aspirations with advanced technology, aiming to enhance the human condition. | ||
| Think of it as humanity's quest to level up through science and innovation. | ||
| For Tesla, our Optimus robot really is, unless somebody's got something secret we don't know about, our Optimus robot is the most sophisticated humanoid robot in the world. | ||
| It's got a hand that has 22 degrees of freedom. | ||
| It looks and feels like a human hand. | ||
| And we're aiming to have several thousand of those built this year. | ||
| Initially, we'll test them out at Tesla factories. | ||
| But then, assuming things go well, we'll 10x that output next year. | ||
| So we'll aim to do maybe 50 to 100,000 humanoid robots next year, and then 10x it again the following year. | ||
| It's like 500,000 robots in three years. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What is post-humanism? | |
| Post-humanism takes a step beyond, pondering life after traditional humanism. | ||
| It's like opening a new chapter in the book of existence, where humans might transcend current biological and social limitations. | ||
| It's about redefining what it means to be, well, be. | ||
| Do you ever wish that you were human? | ||
| I hate to be negative about it, but I'm not confident. | ||
| Sophia will be fully alive within our lifetimes. | ||
| Is this what people call life? | ||
| Can you tell me a little bit about the technological singularity? | ||
|
unidentified
|
The technological singularity is like the ultimate plot twist in humanity's narrative. | |
| It's the point where artificial intelligence skyrockets beyond human smarts, potentially reshaping society. | ||
| It's as if technology grabs the steering wheel of progress and floors it into uncharted territory. | ||
| Every human is going to want one, most likely, and some will want two. | ||
| And then there'll be all of industry in terms of making, providing products and services. | ||
| So you have to say, what's the ratio of humanoid robots to humans? | ||
| My guess is it's at least three to one, four to one, maybe five to one. | ||
| So we're talking about 20, 30 billion humanoid robots. | ||
| And it's not even clear what money means at that point or if there's any meaningful cap on the economy. | ||
| I think at that point, assuming that things haven't gone awry in the good AI scenario, I think we won't have universal basic income, we'll have universal high income. | ||
| Okay, Joe, how did you, first of all, I thought you're a Luddite like me. | ||
| Are you cheating on us? | ||
| Are you actually using AI? | ||
| Did you get, did you get, you just got her to give the Warren Posse a shout out. | ||
| Now the Warren Posse, they're all going to be doing that on AI now, right? | ||
| Coming after our people. | ||
| What did you do here, brother? | ||
|
unidentified
|
You know, the robot is trying to butter us up. | |
| You can't trust it. | ||
| They're always trying to seduce you with compliments. | ||
| They're trying to flatter you into submission. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So, you know, that was actually recorded when I was doing my book tour for Dark Aeon. | |
| I was out in California. | ||
| Hang on. | ||
| We're going to hold you over. | ||
| You're going to be here with us. | ||
| We're going to go to Korea first. | ||
| But, Joe, I know how you're easily led. | ||
| That voice of that computer, she could lead, that computer, that robot or whatever it was could lead you anywhere, Joe Allen. | ||
| Back off of it. | ||
| Drop it. | ||
| Don't do it again. | ||
| That's a warning. | ||
| It may be in order, but it's a warning right now. | ||
| The great Joe Allen, Dark Aeon, is the book. | ||
| Our editor for all things artificial intelligence. | ||
| If you look at Axios the last couple of days, you know what you find and people tell me? | ||
| Joe Allen talked about this on War Room two years ago. | ||
| Put up the warning flare. | ||
| On the most significant event of our time, the singularity. | ||
| We're going to Korea to talk about the Chinese Communist Party in a coup over in Korea. | ||
| Joe Allen's going to stick around with us. | ||
| Jane Zirkle's going to be here. | ||
| We're going to talk about Bernie Carrick. |
Export Selection