July 2, 2025 - Bannon's War Room
47:58
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is the primal scream of a dying regime. | ||
| Pray for our enemies. | ||
| Because we're going medieval on these people. | ||
| Here's not 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're trying 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? | ||
| Mega Media. | ||
| I wish, in my soul, I wish that any of these people had a conscience. | ||
| 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
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Matt. | |
| Tuesday, 1 July, Year of our Lord 2025. | ||
| We just had the great Mike Lindell, who's all about election integrity. | ||
| He's going to Washington, D.C. to have meetings on this. | ||
| I've got Matt Meck up. | ||
| Matt, we have a big gathering in Las Vegas and leave it to the hardcores to have it 4th of July weekend. | ||
| You know you're hardcore on voter integrity when on July 5th, you're at the Ahern Hotel all day doing voter integrity. | ||
| I think it's amazing. | ||
| I'm going to be beamed in as the keynote speaker at the end of this. | ||
| This is kind of from the Steve Stern school of, you know, Steve has these amazing calls every couple of weeks. | ||
| There's another one in two weeks. | ||
| We'll make sure we promote it and get he gets massive audience because people understand all these great policies, all this great stuff we talk about can't happen unless you win elections. | ||
| And we're still in the mode of elections being stolen. | ||
| So Matt, tell me what's going to happen at the Ahern. | ||
| I want to make sure everybody goes to your website. | ||
| Anybody's in the general area because folks, if you're at the Ahern Hotel on a voter integrity thing on the 5th of July on a Saturday, you are MAGA, right? | ||
| In fact, you're ultra MAGA. | ||
| So Matt, tell us what's going to happen, who's going to be there, and where do people go to make sure they can actually get a ticket and attend. | ||
| Yes, sir. | ||
| We are ultra posse. | ||
| What we are doing on the A Hern on the 5th, the great Joe Hoft is going to moderate this event for us. | ||
| We're going to have Brian Kennedy and Boone Cutler presenting on elections administrations and strategy from a political warfare in elections and 5GW in elections. | ||
| We're going to have three secretaries of state remoting in Wyoming, Missouri, and West Virginia, prepping for the 2026 election, especially in light of President Trump's executive order, maybe more to come. | ||
| We're going to have Trennis Evans speaking on behalf of the American Rights Alliance. | ||
| That's him, Peter Ticton, Evan Turk. | ||
| He's going to be talking about election integrity, especially Retina Peters. | ||
| You know, Peter is the lead counsel for that team. | ||
| I believe there's a hearing coming up middle of this month for Tina. | ||
| We're going to have former Representative Kurt Weldon is going to present on Taking America Back and the FBI's election interference into his election, circa 2006. | ||
| We will also then serve the whole afternoon is going to be no kidding, audience participation, hands-on high school kids in attendance to show we've gone from the theoretical to the practical, paper as a source, hand count process from voter registration, voter validation, tabulation, and then reporting. | ||
| Mark Fincham will talk about what he's doing with the American Fenders Institute. | ||
| And of course, not to bury the lead. | ||
| And thanks for all your help, sir, over the several years you've been helping us. | ||
| We've been doing these events since 1 December of 2021. | ||
| And we are hardcore for election integrity period. | ||
| 1 December of 2021. | ||
| Just absolutely amazing. | ||
| And you guys are the toughest. | ||
| You're like the Marine Corps or you're the special force of this. | ||
| Where do people? | ||
| I want people to go right now to the website to see everything that's going to happen and to make sure that they can attend if they're in the gym. | ||
| The people at the Ahern Hotel are absolutely fantastic of how they make accommodations for people. | ||
| So right now, Matt, where do people go? | ||
| Unauthorized.1. | ||
| O-N-E. | ||
| Go to the events right there on the screen. | ||
| Register. | ||
| It's $20. | ||
| You get a breakfast. | ||
| You get lunch. | ||
| It's a full day with the great Stephen K. Bannon as our remote keynote. | ||
| And all the proceeds from this are going to help as we educate folks who are going out the whole West Coast to help, especially a month in California, educating them on election integrity. | ||
| Well, I'm going to give you a fire-breathing keynote so then everybody can go. | ||
| You can start happy hour right after that. | ||
| So honored to do this. | ||
| Matt, you guys are absolutely terrific, and you're the backbone of the voter integrity of this movement. | ||
| So I really appreciate you. | ||
| Appreciate you coming on. | ||
| Appreciate you putting it together. | ||
| Look forward for everybody on Saturday in the A Harn Town in Las Vegas, Nevada. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thanks, sir. | ||
| God bless. | ||
| Grace and Mo, let's push that up. | ||
| Thank you, brother. | ||
| Make sure we get a huge attendance in that. | ||
| Also, the Steve Stern. | ||
| I think Steve's every couple of weeks. | ||
| He has his mass thing. | ||
| I think they got six main impressions the other day. | ||
| It's just incredible what Stern and his team are doing. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Steve Stern of the flag shirt store. | |
| I'm going to do something a little different. | ||
| We don't do a lot of panels here, but I'm going to do a panel. | ||
| The reason is I've got three of my favorite people. | ||
| Batia Unger Sargon, who's a former kind of Democrat. | ||
| She comes as a very populist nationalist perspective. | ||
| I got D-Day Bratt, finally got him back off vacation, second honeymoon. | ||
| I don't know what Bratt was on, but it was taking him all over the world, and Bratt's now back with us. | ||
| And of course, Dave Walsh, who understands energy, I think, better than anybody, but on a global basis, can always get us ahead of the curve, but particularly understands President Trump's full-spectrum energy dominance, which I don't think is being factored in here. | ||
| And I think there's some stuff in the Big Beautiful bill that maybe it's big, but it maybe ain't so beautiful. | ||
| So we're going to get to all that. | ||
| Here's what I want to do first. | ||
| I want to go back and play Chip Royce because, folks, there's going to be a throwdown, I think, tomorrow. | ||
| Speaker Johnson is saying he wants this thing signed as is. | ||
| I just don't see that happening. | ||
| I think there are legitimate questions about some of the parts of the big, beautiful bill. | ||
| I think it's gonna be thrown down. | ||
| But I want to have Chip's perspective because he lays out a case I think has to be addressed. | ||
| Let's go ahead and play it. | ||
| It comes to things we disagree with when you just assume what is current policy rather than having us vote on said policy. | ||
| I've seen a lot of messaging and rhetoric coming from very good friends of mine talking about how it's somehow an anathema or accepting leftist dogma to say and to ask the question about a policy baseline about whether or not that is foregoing our responsibility to do the math. | ||
| You can believe that the current tax rates that are X, whether it's for the lowest bracket or the highest, should stay the same. | ||
| And I take on face value that many of my colleagues, the administration and myself included, would like them to stay at that level or even lower. | ||
| That's my preference. | ||
| But if you do that, you have to do math. | ||
| What will be the impact then on revenue? | ||
| And my colleagues, I think, in the Senate in particular, because God bless the House, at least we created a framework by which we were trying to do dollar for dollar. | ||
| And I realized my colleagues on the other side of the aisle disagreed with that. | ||
| But I want to give credit to the Budget Committee Chairman for trying to hold a line of saying that there ought to at least be a connection, that we ought to at least say, if we're going to do the tax policy, at least do the spending policy. | ||
| Have the courage and the fortitude to do what you campaign on when you're talking about balancing the dang budget. | ||
| Don't just talk about it. | ||
| Don't talk about balanced budget amendments and then go home and say, look at me. | ||
| I got a balanced budget amendment vote. | ||
| Did it fail? | ||
| No, it failed. | ||
| Is it law? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| Right? | ||
| But I mean, I got you your tax cuts. | ||
| But ignore, ignore that inflation that is a result of $37 trillion of debt. | ||
| My colleagues in the Senate failed us. | ||
| My colleagues in the Senate failed us. | ||
| They sent us a bill knowingly using a policy baseline gimmick. | ||
| They sent it knowingly. | ||
| And they sent it knowing that it was going to have increased deficits. | ||
| Last question, I'm sorry, it's for my good friend from Texas who I don't really want to put on the spot here in a way that's beyond, I think, the core question, but this matters. | ||
| Regardless of what one thinks about these policies and wanting to be able to have the economic growth, I want the tax cuts to be permanent. | ||
| I want all this stuff. | ||
| But is it fair to say that the lion's share of the deficits will be in the first five years of the 10-year budget window? | ||
| Is that fair to say? | ||
| Yes, that's fair. | ||
| Is that relatively, irrefutably fair to say? | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's irrefutable to my knowledge. | |
| The only way to refute the idea that in the first four to five years of the budget window that we will have significant deficits to the tune of probably close to $2 trillion, $1.8 trillion, even on a dynamic basis, assuming the budget committee's numbers, that you have to make up for it in the tail in the last five years of the budget window, the only way to do that, to the best of my knowledge, is to assume more revenue for tariffs and assume higher growth rates. | ||
| So I think you have to assume, I haven't done the exact math, 3% to 3.5% growth over 10 years, which I hope we have and we should aspire to get, and tariff revenue at the rate that we currently are bringing it in or more, which CBO has scored to CBO's math, 2.1, 8 trillion? | ||
| I just said that from memory, something like that. | ||
| Something about $280 billion a year. | ||
| So you have to assume that tariff revenue and assume, call it 3.5% roughly growth. | ||
| Then you start to kind of wash out what we're doing in Congress by our choice. | ||
| Everything we just said, we're leaving essentially the administration to go carry out. | ||
| If I've characterized anything incorrectly, does anybody want to challenge what I just said mathematically? | ||
|
unidentified
|
With that, I will yield back. | |
| Thank you, Mr. Roy. | ||
| Okay, this is what I've been spending hours behind the scenes banging on. | ||
| If you're going to sell this deal, you've got to sell the deal. | ||
| I mean, this is like being an investment banking. | ||
| When you get a merger, you get a big acquisition, you're going to do a public offering. | ||
| I don't care what you're going to do, sell a bunch of bonds. | ||
| You've got to tell the story. | ||
| And you have to tell the story in a way that it's accessible. | ||
| We're doing a supply-side tax cut, okay? | ||
| A big part of this is for business. | ||
| And some of what they're doing is on amortization and depreciation and expensing big capital investments and period zero to make sure that you don't have to pay as much taxes to incentivize business to put capital, to invest capital and put capital to work. | ||
| When they say static versus dynamic, the CBO is a very static model. | ||
| Okay, kind of puts the math in there and you see, and this is how they get the $3.3 trillion, I think, increased deficits over time. | ||
| Now, it doesn't have to be like dynamics are much, obviously closer to reality of what it's done, but all those pieces have to be brought together. | ||
| You have to, Stephen Miron, Joe Lavanier, the Secretary of Treasury, Scott Bessett. | ||
| I'd love to see Hassett. | ||
| He's head of NEC. | ||
| Ought to be on every show, in every podcast. | ||
| Wash, rinse, repeat. | ||
| Wash, rinse, repeat. | ||
| What Chip Roy is saying there is not crazy. | ||
| Sometimes he's put, oh, he's anti-Trump. | ||
| He's crazy. | ||
| It's not crazy. | ||
| It's actually very well thought through. | ||
| Those have to be answered. | ||
| The MAGA movement and President Trump are making a huge bet here, right? | ||
| And they are asking for a $5 trillion lift to the debt ceiling. | ||
| Let's be honest about it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This is what part of this is. | |
| There are answers to this, and there is a model of this, and there's a logic. | ||
| There's an industrial logic of what they're doing. | ||
| What Scott Besson says: we're going to get economic growth of, they say, 2.8%, leading to over 3% of what Chip just said there, to actually drive growth, drive dynamism, get the animal spirits rolling in the United States of America, | ||
| to have a dynamic growing economy, coupled with everything he's doing on energy, everything he's doing on tariffs, everything he's doing on deconstructing the administrative state and deregulation, everything he's doing with deporting people that are here, that are really taking advantage of government benefits and Medicaid and all that and getting them home. | ||
| And at the same time, sealing the border so you don't have this intense pressure against the low-skilled workers, African-American and Hispanics. | ||
| And you're just seeing already 2.2% wage growth. | ||
| It's all hitting together. | ||
| But it has to be explained. | ||
| It ain't going to sell itself, guys. | ||
| We have to sell it. | ||
| And there's not anything about, oh, we have to sell it. | ||
| It's a sophisticated economic plan. | ||
| And people can understand it if you break it down and you just do it over and over and over again, like right there. | ||
| That end just kills me. | ||
| What do you have anything for you that? | ||
| Well, no, it's just fine. | ||
| Okay, then chip just goes unanswered. | ||
| Then you're going to get a lot of throwdown tomorrow. | ||
| And you're going to be, you know, people are going to be putting out true socials. | ||
| And what we need to do is answer the questions because we have the answers. | ||
| Now, Batia, you're with me. | ||
| There is a simple solution. | ||
| It's not to solve the problem. | ||
| Raising taxes on the wealthy does not solve the problem. | ||
| The problem here is quite deep and quite structural. | ||
| But what's your take on Chip Roy? | ||
| And what would be your kind of answer that you think comes from a populist perspective, ma'am? | ||
| Thank you so much for having me, sir. | ||
| I think he's almost there. | ||
| I mean, he's outlined perfectly the problem with the math. | ||
| So what is the answer? | ||
| And you have done such a great job of saying there's a very simple way to at least get us a little bit further along towards an answer. | ||
| So I think from the math point of view, from the moral point of view, and from the political point of view, raising taxes on the wealthy is just a winner. | ||
| It helps with the math. | ||
| It helps pay down the deficit. | ||
| Morally, I mean, why are we comfortable taking a risk on rural hospitals? | ||
| But we're not comfortable saying to a billionaire, pay a little more, you'll never feel it. | ||
| I think there's this fallacy that they couldn't have kept the tax cuts for the working class and the middle class while then raising it for the rich. | ||
| And another fallacy you pointed out, which is a really good one, that the brackets have to stay where they are. | ||
| Why should it be that a person who's making $500,000 a year should be in the same tax bracket as a billionaire? | ||
| And this brings me to the political question, which is 65% of Americans who make over $500,000 a year now, so that top bracket as it is right now, are Democrats. | ||
| Why is the party of the working class bending over backwards to give tax cuts to Democrats? | ||
| For every billionaire who backed President Trump, Kamala Harris had two. | ||
| Why is the party of the working class bending over backwards? | ||
| It's like they have this muscle memory. | ||
| There's another fallacy here that corporate taxes and taxes for the rich are the same thing. | ||
| They're not. | ||
| The president has been brilliant in using dropping the corporate tax rate to bring back and reshore manufacturing to increase the incentive for jobs creators. | ||
| That's great. | ||
| That's totally different from salt deductions for rich liberals. | ||
| So I think you've been completely correct on this. | ||
| And I truly appreciate the point you made earlier that seeing 18 Republicans join Susan Collins and even consider, contemplate going to people making over $25 million a year and saying, you pay for the rural hospitals, I think that's a really good sign of where the party's going. | ||
| By the way, I want that, if the production team, you get that Hill story, I want to put that up. | ||
| Batia, you said the most brilliant thing, and I've got a piece of evidence to back Batia Unger Sargon up when she said most of the billionaires and most of the wealthier Democrats. | ||
| Let's go back to January, February, and March of 2021, in the darkest days of the MAGA movement, folks. | ||
| You probably were not too focused on this. | ||
| But as you do remember, the Democratic Party under Nancy Pelosi controlled the House. | ||
| You remember that. | ||
| They had the Senate with Chuck Schumer and hapless Joe Biden on a stolen election was at the White House. | ||
| They had their trifecta. | ||
| And Bernie Sanders and all these guys made a big deal. | ||
| And Foca Honda, they made a huge deal. | ||
| Elizabeth Warren made a huge deal about taxing the wealthy, taxing the wealthy. | ||
| It didn't even get out of committee. | ||
| They didn't even really have any hearings. | ||
| They had some performance stuff. | ||
| Nothing got done. | ||
| The Democrats don't tax the wealthy because the party structure is they have billionaire and a wealthy donor class. | ||
| Then they have the credentialed class that's kind of wandering around. | ||
| You see them now in that campaign in New York City, their credentialed class, and then it drops all the way down to they kind of have this group of not even working poor, kind of indigent. | ||
| That's the Democratic Party. | ||
| They've totally cut out the working class. | ||
| It used to be the party of the working class. | ||
| My family were all Democrats, Union Democrats. | ||
| It used to be the party of the middle class. | ||
| It's not. | ||
| It's abandoned that. | ||
| And what Bacia is just saying, yo, here's the logic. | ||
| When they controlled it, they didn't raise taxes. | ||
| The reason they didn't raise, they talk about it and they called Trump and all of us, oh, we're doing it for the oligarchs. | ||
| We're the anti-oligarchs. | ||
| You just saw in the vote on AI. | ||
| The Democrats had total control. | ||
| They could have done anything they wanted. | ||
| They could have passed anything they wanted. | ||
| What did they do? | ||
| The one thing they didn't do, they had some performance on taxes and didn't raise taxes on the wealthy. | ||
| They didn't even come close. | ||
| Why? | ||
| They don't have any interest. | ||
| They're donors that control the party like puppets are not going to allow that to happen. | ||
| The credential classes, that's there. | ||
| So it's logical. | ||
| And I'm quite frankly so proud that we actually got out and Collins on these rural hospitals. | ||
| And you know, we're not huge fans of Susan Collins, but she kind of put it out there and said, hey, if we're not going to shut down these rural hospitals, which, oh, by the way, folks, it's kind of the backbone of the mega movement, okay? | ||
| And make America healthy again. | ||
| We've got two movements and we're trying to merge it into one is one of the reasons we built this amazing coalition that we won. | ||
| And President Trump, if you read the Pew Research Assessment of what went down, it's monumental, and that's because we brought so many different types together. | ||
| And so it's absolutely essential. | ||
| Dave Walsh, I want to go to you now on the energy part of this. | ||
| Why are we not selling? | ||
| First off, the Big Beautiful Bill has got some big ugly in it, okay? | ||
| Because of these Republican senators and these harebrain ideas that we just haven't gotten rid of. | ||
| I want to talk about that, but also they don't make the case of full-spectrum energy dominance in any aspect. | ||
| President Trump has got policies out there. | ||
| They're reverting. | ||
| We're going back to the full spectrum energy dominance of the first term, which got us the 3.4% growth in the fourth quarter of 2019 when all of his policies were hitting on all cylinders. | ||
| Dave Walsh. | ||
| And since that time, electrification in the country since that 2019 benchmark has only grown by 2% since that entire time, cumulatively, not per year. | ||
| And that's the problem. | ||
| This bill, it's got two features in it. | ||
| One says that for projects executed through 2027, the solar and wind and battery storage tax credits remain unless they're 5% funded in the coming year. | ||
| If any project, lose language, 5% funded in the coming year post the bill being ratified can occur at any time over the next 20 to 30 years, as long as it's been 5% funded in the next year. | ||
| And that can mean a whole bunch of things, the project will be subsidized as per the past. | ||
| So that's a gigantic, gigantic opener for all of this stuff to come forward in the next year and be approved by state public service commissions to move forward in regulated states. | ||
| And the only projects submitted in states that aren't regulated with open power pools like MISO and PJM to have all of these projects be subsidized. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hold it, hang on. | |
| Is this the green new scam? | ||
| Are these elements left over on the green new scam? | ||
| They're still in there. | ||
| And if they only get 5% funding, they can then stick around and get full funding? | ||
| Is this President Trump's railing against this? | ||
| Is this part of that? | ||
| It's entirely that. | ||
| It's entirely that. | ||
| So it becomes a real anathema for the president to call this his bill. | ||
| Up to this time, he has. | ||
| It becomes really oxymoronic to call it his bill at this stage with that kind of a codicil that's now arrived inside it in the last 20 hours. | ||
| I mean, this is a complete disaster, the fact of that kind of opener being provided. | ||
| And the investment banks are cheering this on. | ||
| They're making huge money underwriting these projects. | ||
| The tax credits alone vastly exceed the value of 5% commitment to these kinds of projects. | ||
| They'll be all over pushing these forward en masse, 20 years worth of them within the next year to push these forward. | ||
| So this has to be shot down in the House. | ||
| It's got to be. | ||
| Otherwise, it can't be called President Trump's bill with that kind of opener to continue the massive billions of solar and wind subsidies because the real problem with it is the lack of electrification this stuff provides. | ||
| It's intermittent, very part-time power, owing to the fact that for six years, including 2025, we've grown electricity supply by only 2% because that's now 90% of what we're doing. | ||
| Part-time, five-hour a day solar is now 70% of the total new electrification. | ||
| Is there any chance? | ||
| We've talked about this all the time. | ||
| If we don't scrap this and get refocused, is there any way, can he hit the three in the 3.0, the 3.5% growth? | ||
| Because he's got full spectrum energy dominance on oil and gas, et cetera. | ||
| But if we don't junk this, is that going to be a headwind? | ||
| If you were talking to the president right now, you're saying, hey, we've got to hit these growth targets. | ||
| That's what the key to this whole plan is. | ||
| And you're not going to do it because we're not growing electrification fast enough. | ||
| And the reason we're not doing that, we're doing all this crap on the net carbon zero that got the Germans upside down. | ||
| I might add the Germans are rearming at a rate nobody's ever seen before. | ||
| Far be it, I love it, but far be it for me to say they're doing that to make up because all their other industrial production has died because of the net zero carbon. | ||
| Can President Trump's plan be executed if you still have the baggage from the Green New Deals, sir? | ||
| It cannot be. | ||
| The reindustrialization, the reshoring called for inside the plan, the heavy participation in the AI and data center economy cannot happen with 2% electrification growth every five years. | ||
| We're talking about electrification growth needing to be 40 to 50 percent over the next five years. | ||
| It can't be 2% in a whole five years because this stuff doesn't produce, excuse my bad language, hardly enough electricity to matter. | ||
| It just doesn't. | ||
| You need to retain all the power plants we now have. | ||
| That's something critical that's going to have to be done through the EPA, through Zeldon, through the Department of Energy. | ||
| Cessation of any further plant close downs at this point in time, looking at reopening as many as we possibly can that were shuttered the last three to four years, and then a massive build out of new combined cycle baseload power plants to the extent feasible. | ||
| By the way, the turbines will be there. | ||
| There's all kinds of happy talk about the companies being sold out. | ||
| That can change, that can be made to change. | ||
| And part of the reason they're sold out is regulated utilities like Duke and Florida Power Light have made huge commitments to GE to buy these machines, but to wait for their server center clients to let them have the power coming from them and then let the people eat cake with this five times more costly solar power because that's what that costs. | ||
| So no, you can't have Germany and England are case studies why that model does not work. | ||
| It does not work. | ||
| England is completely a case study. | ||
| President Trump was absolutely adamant about this. | ||
| Anyway, hang on for a second. | ||
| We're going to take A short commercial break. | ||
| Still got Dave Bracta here, and then we're going to go around again. | ||
| Kind of like this. | ||
| Got three of my best people up here, and they're bringing the heat on a Tuesday in June. | ||
| Anniversary of my going to prison. | ||
| Next man up, and you're looking at some of the great folks that were next man up. | ||
| And I got to tell you, I didn't give them a lot of instruction. | ||
| Just go ahead and do it. | ||
| The great Johnny Khan's going to take us out. | ||
| Birch Gold. | ||
| Go to EndofTheDollar Empire. | ||
| BirchGold.com. | ||
| Promo code Bannon slash Bannon. | ||
| We got a team in Rio right now in the run-up to the BRICS Nations, the global south sitting there going, hey, we're not going to do this anymore. | ||
| We're going to break it all down. | ||
| Talk to finance ministers, central banks, and why they're buying gold at record rates. | ||
| You need to understand this. | ||
| You need to understand why gold has been a hedge for, I don't know, 5,000 years of man's history. | ||
| Find out what drives it. | ||
| It's never about the price of gold. | ||
| It's what drives the price of gold. | ||
| Short break. | ||
| We'll be back in a moment. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I got American faith in America's heart. | |
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| You can also take your phone out. | ||
| One of the quick ways to get in contact with Philip Patrick and the team is take your phone out and text Bannon at 9898-98. | ||
| You got the ultimate guide to investing in gold and precious metals in the age of Trump. | ||
| It's laid out very succinctly. | ||
| It talks about all the methodologies you can do it, all the tax-deferred ways you can do it. | ||
| So make sure you go check that out today. | ||
| Very simple handbook. | ||
| It gets you the in-depth understanding of gold and precious metals in the age of Trump. | ||
| And you also start the process of getting a relationship with Philip Patrick and the team that we've got down in Brazil right now to talk to kind of meet the global south and explain to you why the central banks of the global south are buying, I don't know, gold at record rates as they have done for the last year. | ||
| It's not the price of gold, it's the process of how it gets there. | ||
| That's important. | ||
| I'm trying to teach you not giving you a fish, but teaching you how to fish. | ||
| Dave Adams, Dave Walsh, the engine room is telling me, if we can do that the panel up again, the engine room is telling me that Dave Walsh will become a combo, a combination of Grizzly Adams meets outlaw Josie Wales. | ||
| It's not too shabby. | ||
| There's a lot we can work with there, Dave Walsh. | ||
| Unbelievable. | ||
| Very distinguished. | ||
| I like the beard. | ||
| The beard works. | ||
| The beard works. | ||
| So, Dave Bratt, you're back. | ||
| Dave, you were gone. | ||
| Was that a second honeymoon? | ||
| Was it a vacation? | ||
| Were you on a speaking tour? | ||
| You were out of touch for like a week, and the audience was missing you big time, sir. | ||
| I get no break. | ||
| I was realigning the Judeo-Christian West with Liz Truss and Nigel Farage and the Speaker of the House Poots in Northern Ireland and arranging for proper Western education. | ||
| And by the way, I'm wearing blue right now because I'm in my cheap laptop here. | ||
| It appears to give off the appearance I'm wearing pink shirts the last time. | ||
| So Dave Walsh, don't let him give you any junk. | ||
| Just hit him right back. | ||
| Give him a little guff. | ||
| Okay, so Dave Bratt, you were elected to Congress. | ||
| You were part. | ||
| I think you were part of the Freedom Caucus. | ||
| I believe you were there, one of the founders or near the founding. | ||
| Chip Roy proudly, Chip Roy speaking a lot of logic, but you got the Senate bills. | ||
| You got it. | ||
| Tell him to square the circle. | ||
| Square the circle for us. | ||
| Yeah, I'll square the, I'm going to first get to the solution before you cut me off. | ||
| And so the solution is very simple, right? | ||
| The marginal rate cuts, the tax package is over $2 trillion there. | ||
| The investment package is only about $200 billion. | ||
| So the solution is very simple. | ||
| You just cut, you take away the rich marginal tax rate benefit and roughly, you know, and the left says, you know, the rich are getting all the benefits. | ||
| You know, the top 10% are getting 50%. | ||
| Yeah, but they're also paying 50% of the taxes. | ||
| So that's a wash, right? | ||
| So let's just keep the economic engine running for capitalism. | ||
| And instead of giving them the marginal rate, just shove all the money from the marginal rates over to investment, right? | ||
| Into capital investment, which is only 200 billion in the bill. | ||
| And then you get massive economic growth. | ||
| You square the equity cycle, right? | ||
| This argument from the left against the rich. | ||
| We got a mayor in New York City right now saying we're going to deregulate hot dog huts. | ||
| That's his solution to free market capitalism after the left put in all those regulations. | ||
| But this is serious. | ||
| And Chip, Chip, so there's your solution on the tax side. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It'll work. | |
| Hang on, hang on. | ||
| Hold on. | ||
| Hang on. | ||
| Baccia's eyes just crossed is the behalf of the audience. | ||
| I want to slow down and go back to that. | ||
| I know you Austrian. | ||
| You see, this is the way the Austrian School of Economics works. | ||
| They throw out some big thing and then they just zip by it, and you're so embarrassed to say, oh, I didn't really understand that. | ||
| You just stay quiet. | ||
| No, no, no, no, no. | ||
| We're going to go back. | ||
| Talk to me about the $2 trillion. | ||
| The $2 trillion is the total tax. | ||
| And when you say the investment, these are things that are designated in the bill as investments. | ||
| But that's not the corporate investment. | ||
| They're getting a big tax cut because, and we're doing all types of things on the accounting side to make sure we're driving private. | ||
| This is not done for public investment. | ||
| President Trump, what he wants is private investment. | ||
| So walk me through the $2 trillion versus the $200 billion in that regard. | ||
| Yes, the marginal, reducing everyone's marginal rates, right? | ||
| So that's nice and sounds great and it's all good. | ||
| But it's not as pro-growth as totally going after capital investment, right? | ||
| I've been on this show forever. | ||
| Productivity has been going down for 70 years. | ||
| How do you solve that? | ||
| You shove all the money from the rich into capital investment. | ||
| Take away their marginal rate, right? | ||
| The lower marginal rate they're going to get. | ||
| Jack that back up. | ||
| But then, And this is macro 101 if people want to look it up, right? | ||
| The rationale in free market capitalism is that the rich can only consume so much, right? | ||
| And so, and they invest all the rest. | ||
| Well, it's not so true anymore, right? | ||
| They're buying yachts that are like two football fields right now. | ||
| They're pretty good at consumption. | ||
| And so, we want to make all the rich money go into capital investment that builds plants and goes along with President Trump's reshoring and his tariff package to just take the money and the marginal rate piece is way bigger than everything else, right? | ||
| It's $2 trillion. | ||
| And the rich get the biggest share of that. | ||
| So take away that part and give it back to the rich, but only if they do capital investment. | ||
| Then the rich are happy. | ||
| Everybody's happy. | ||
| A blue collar gets their wages go up. | ||
| And, you know, Chip hit the, I'm abstracting from the swamp because spending is totally out of control. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| But hang on. | ||
| If the Gundy supplies ain't grow, we're out of here. | ||
| And one of the arguments they are making behind the scenes is that right now, I think the top 1%, something like they drive 50% of the consumer economy. | ||
| So the two arguments they're making is number one, the deportations hurt you and the ceiling of the border may help the working class, but those people actually come and spend everything. | ||
| So they're adding a point to GDP. | ||
| This is what they're saying behind the scenes. | ||
| And also that, hey, you can't cut the marginal tax rates because the consumer economy we have is driven by the wealthy. | ||
| And if you want to see the GDP hit an air pocket, cut that. | ||
| But that being said, and let's put a pin in it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That's it. | |
| You're saying. | ||
| And I'm about to actually cry here. | ||
| I think I'm going to get a tear going here because am I hearing actually Dave Brett, the PhD in Austrian economics, are you actually saying that you have no problem with either the snapback or raising the marginal rates on the wealthy on their income, sir? | ||
| No, I just said it's a perfect trade-off. | ||
| I watched the movie Dave, you know, he's like Forrest Gump, you know, that movie 20 years ago. | ||
| He just had these simple solutions. | ||
| You just take the money away from them on the marginal rate side and shove it into capital investment. | ||
| And if they want to argue with that, let them argue all day. | ||
| Say, we just gave you a chance to get even richer. | ||
| And so, yeah, it's an easy solution politically. | ||
| And I think everyone will go for it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Now separate the sheep from the what else. | |
| But just simplified, how do you take the snapback on the marginal tax side for their income? | ||
| What methodology or mechanism do you lower capital gains rates? | ||
| Do you tell them that they can get away from paying those taxes if they do it in investment, if they invest in equities, they invest in infrastructure projects? | ||
| I mean, how do you make, I know you Austrian economists just say, hey, assume it happens and voila, it happens. | ||
| I'm a simple Mick. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Can you just explain to me how you go from that? | |
| Already I'm excited. | ||
| You're saying raise taxes on the wealthy, but you've got a trade-off, which could be brilliant, but just explain how it actually happens. | ||
| Of course it's brilliant. | ||
| It's not Austrian. | ||
| They're all atheists. | ||
| Adam Smith is good. | ||
| The Chicago school's good. | ||
| But it's just macro 101. | ||
| And so you just, you got over $2 trillion in this current package on the marginal rate piece. | ||
| That's huge. | ||
| A huge chunk of that's going to the rich. | ||
| So just change the marginal rates there so the rich don't get their lower marginal rate and shove it all proportionally into the investment mix package that's already there. | ||
| And then have a good economic growth debate. | ||
| What should that be? | ||
| What constitutes real capital investment? | ||
| And I hope it's not the green stuff. | ||
| Dave Walsh's been all over that, right? | ||
| The CBO and all the government gurus have changed definition of what counts as capital over the last 10 years as well. | ||
| We got to get back to the real nuts and bolts of American manufacturing, that the money should primarily go there. | ||
| And then getting back to the spending side, the House and the Senate outflanked President Trump on this. | ||
| They're geniuses. | ||
| They got the Excel spreadsheet in the sky and they worked this stuff to a science. | ||
| And so going forward, you got to put your congressmen and congresswomen and senators on the record for next time on paper for spending commitments. | ||
| It can't come down to the last minute like this every time. | ||
| It's a joke. | ||
| We all know how it works in the Freedom Caucus and we can align a strategy to make that happen. | ||
| Do you think, okay, do you think that we can hit the 2.8 to 3.5% growth that we're going to need if you don't make these changes to the tax structure, if you don't somehow incentivize, raise rates for the wealthy, but incentivize them through other tax mechanisms to invest this back into capital equipment, into investments that they can get tremendous returns on? | ||
| But you do that? | ||
| Do you think that this supply side plan actually can work unless we do something like that? | ||
| You know, the reason I got fired is because I tell the truth. | ||
| And so part of the problem, Chip raised it, right? | ||
| It's this baseline and all this stuff. | ||
| The problem is there's nothing hyper new coming at us, right? | ||
| The tax cuts are already in place. | ||
| We're going to keep them, right? | ||
| And so the IMF and the World Bank and the CBO and the Federal Reserve all have us growing at 2%, as does the leading figure in productivity over the past 70 years, at 2%. | ||
| And so yes, do I think Trump, if he gets rid of the environmental regulatory horror piece, but it looks like the swamp is winning right now. | ||
| That's why Dave Walsh is so frustrated when the president finds out what happened overnight. | ||
| He's going to be horrified. | ||
| The AI guys, right? | ||
| Botch is great on the wage workers. | ||
| Wait till the wage workers find out what happens with AI and all this stuff going forward. | ||
| That heightens it, you know, exponential growth of inequality. | ||
| And so, yes, it's okay. | ||
| The rich make them prove their case on productivity and, you know, figure out some way to give them the benefits after they get the growth. | ||
| And it's fairly simple. | ||
| If you succeed, good, you get benefits. | ||
| Hang on for a second. | ||
| Baccho, about this AI, you're seeing this tsunami now coming for particularly for white-collar, lower-level white-collar people under 35, the coders, all that. | ||
| How is that going to play into this about the frustration? | ||
| you're seeing some of that frustration play out in New York City right now in this mayor race. | ||
| How is that the AI revolution, which clearly the accelerationists want to keep the pedal to the metal and other people saying, hey, we got to think this thing through? | ||
| Your thoughts, ma'am. | ||
| First of all, I don't think you should let Dave off the hook because I love everything he just said. | ||
| But, you know, the idea that the Freedom Caucus is now supporting raising taxes on the rich, this is you, Steve, and President Trump. | ||
| And they're going to act like, well, this is totally obvious. | ||
| I say this with love, Dave. | ||
| I love everything you said. | ||
| I'm so thrilled to hear you say it. | ||
| But it's not obvious. | ||
| It's not totally obvious. | ||
| It's a freaking revolution. | ||
| And I'm so honored to be here to see it. | ||
| Okay, that's the first thing. | ||
| Second thing on AI. | ||
| You know, the Department of Labor is thinking in a really interesting, creative way about how to use AI to give blue collar workers an advantage in a workplace in which there was always this cap, right? | ||
| If you were in the blue collar workforce, you could only progress to here, let's say, but the management track, you had to have a college degree for. | ||
| And what the Department of Labor is thinking about is how can we give blue collar workers AI skills and training that would let them jump the track and start to get into the track for those jobs that really pay $200,000 a year in management. | ||
| I think it's a really exciting time. | ||
| As you mentioned, Steve, in the first hour, President Trump in his first term was the first president in 60 years to have more income growth for the bottom 25% of wage earners than the top 25%, that sort of, you know, the trust fund, socialist, mumdani, over-credentialed college elites who are hogging the American dream. | ||
| And so I really think AI could be seen as another mechanism in the toolbox like controlling the border and controlling the supply of labor, like tariffs that are this brilliant way that the president thinks about using the free market itself to redistribute access to the American dream to the blue-collar heartland. | ||
| Amazing. | ||
| Hang on for a second. | ||
| Let's go to Dave Walsh. | ||
| Dave, I think when Dave Bratt talks about increasing marginal tax rates and putting that back into investment, I mean, that's the core of what you've been saying. | ||
| Unless we get this energy thing right, the energy revolution, the full spectrum energy dominance, there's no chance we're going to hit these growth targets that we need to hit to make sure that the deficits don't explode and the debt doesn't explode on us, correct? | ||
| Well, he's exactly right. | ||
| But if you go deeper into it and you look at energy doesn't need to be subsidized really in any form, we're going to need energy. | ||
| Energy is a great investment to make for the private sector without it being subsidized. | ||
| You let the market dictate what are the most efficient, most cost-effective forms of energy to exploit, and you'll exploit them cost-effectively. | ||
| You don't need to incentivize nuclear, solar, wind, hydro. | ||
| Nothing needs incentivized. | ||
| It needs to be cut loose. | ||
| The problem with what we're doing is we're incentivizing that which runs intermittently and part-time, five hours a day of solar, seven hours a day of wind, creates a total disaster of a paucity of energy. | ||
| We have a big program in Florida underway for about $45 billion to be spent in the next 10 years all on solar and battery storage by the three major utilities here. | ||
| Only that. | ||
| And what that does, it saturates the time between 9 a.m. and 4 a.m. with power and does nothing for the rest of the time because there's no sun power before 9 a.m. and after 4 p.m. | ||
| So you've got already a massive oversupply of that to begin with with the first 10,000 megawatts of this they've built. | ||
| And it's because it's in large part because it's subsidized. | ||
| The Public Power Act of 1930 made that unappropriate and illegal. | ||
| States have been mandated the power to decide what their power generation is and what it costs and what it costs. | ||
| Those costs shouldn't be massed over by federal legislation that subsidizes it up to 45, 46%, including this production tax credit that will be continued. | ||
| And especially with this next year thing of 5% being committed, not even spent on new projects. | ||
| This will go on for 20 years. | ||
| This is a complete disaster to economic growth. | ||
| Complete. | ||
| The House has got to unwind this. | ||
| Dave, thank you for breaking this on the show and walking people through it. | ||
| Where do people go to get to outlaw Josie Walsh, to get to all your information you put up? | ||
| Social media. | ||
| So at Dave Walsh Energy and Getter Cruise Social X. Thank you, Steve. | ||
| It's fantastic. | ||
| Great. | ||
| Batia, where do people go? | ||
| Get your books. | ||
| Think you might be working on a new one. | ||
| Your last book was outstanding. | ||
| Where do they go to get on, in particular your Twitter feed? | ||
| Yes, I'm at Bunger Sargon on Twitter. | ||
| I'm at BatiaUS on Instagram. | ||
| I love hearing from the War Room posse. | ||
| Please reach out to me. | ||
| I read all my DMs. | ||
| I do my best to write back to all of them. | ||
| I don't always succeed, but love hearing from you guys. | ||
| Steve, thank you so much. | ||
| God bless you and happy anniversary on being a free man. | ||
| Well, actually, it's an anniversary of actually going to prison. | ||
| Four months from now will do the anniversary of being a free man. | ||
| But thank you, man. | ||
| Appreciate you. | ||
| Appreciate you highlighting the other day about the illegal aliens on Medicaid. | ||
| That went a long way to getting things solved. | ||
| Senator Schmidt and the great team in there in the Senate that did it. | ||
| Dave Walsh, I mean, Dave Bratt, just give me a headline. | ||
| Give me a minute on how tough this is going to be in the House tomorrow, you think, since you know a lot of these guys. | ||
| Oh, it's absolutely brutal. | ||
| The full weight of all the capitalist, which is not a capitalist world, right? | ||
| That's Rabach's critique. | ||
| I'm a highly misunderstood man in the Judeo-Christian West. | ||
| I want what's good for this country. | ||
| And right now, the populist revolution is what's right for this country, right? | ||
| The magnificent seven and all the corrupt elites run the world. | ||
| The richest seven counties are right around Washington, D.C. Go figure, right? | ||
| We need to take all that. | ||
| We don't have any free markets right now. | ||
| The Washington Post today noticed the bond market vigilantes. | ||
| There's a shocker. | ||
| The Wall Street Journal today wrote an apologist piece saying the free market needs defenders. | ||
| I wish you believed in free markets, Wall Street Journal. | ||
| You're a colossal joke. | ||
| And so that's the problem. | ||
| We need to take apart Leviathan, restore power back to the people. | ||
| That's what I believe in. | ||
| That's what's going to happen. | ||
| And you can follow me on the war room. | ||
| What about Brad Economics? | ||
| I want to make sure I get to Brad Economics. | ||
| Where's that? | ||
| Yeah, I got 20 charts on everything bad in the world that happened after 1971 when we got off gold. | ||
| The Federal Reserve has failed us. | ||
| Brad Economics on Getter and X. And Kevin Freeman picked that thing up. | ||
| And people are, Liz Truss wanted those charts. | ||
| It's a global phenomenon. | ||
| Go study them. | ||
| Get your young people. | ||
| Once you understand that, we can fix the problem. | ||
| Thank you, brother. | ||
| Appreciate it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Bet. | |
| Batia and Dave Walsh. | ||
| Fantastic. | ||
| Great panel tonight. | ||
| I think that worked. | ||
| Let me try that more often. | ||
| He just said all the bad stuff that happened in 1971 when President Nixon took us off the gold standard. | ||
| Why was that? | ||
| Because our currency used to be anchored in something and it's not now. | ||
| The dollar, which is the prime reserve currency, is a fiat currency. | ||
| You have to understand, when you understand gold, you understand how the world works. | ||
| Remember, Philip Patrick and myself both came from the investment banking industry. | ||
| We were not gold bugs at all. | ||
| But if you've seen what's happened to fiat currencies over the last 30, 40, 50 years, you understand that you need to understand what a hedge is. | ||
| And that's what gold has been. | ||
| Gold's been on a tear this century. | ||
| It's outperformed this S ⁇ P 500. | ||
| That's not supposed to happen to a hedge against financial turbulence. | ||
| Birchgold.com, promo code Bannon. | ||
| You get all the access to free information. | ||
| And more importantly, you start to build a relationship with Philip Patrick and his team so that you can start to get some financial stability in your own life. | ||
| Great show today. |
Export Selection