July 9, 2025 - Bannon's War Room
48:55
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is the final screen of a dying regime. | ||
| Pray for our enemies. | ||
| Because we're going to medieval on these people. | ||
| Everyone's not going to free shot 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 lie? | ||
| 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
|
Waru, here's your host, Stephen K. Mann. | |
| It is Wednesday, the 9th of July, year of our Lord 2025. | ||
| Welcome. | ||
| We've got a VIP guest, Gail Slater from the Justice Department, Department of Justice Antitrust Division. | ||
| Thank you so much for coming. | ||
| And I know it's tough to, first off, to book people with the Justice Department, particularly someone as busy as you, that is helping to make sure that we keep in check too much concentration of power. | ||
| Talk for a second. | ||
| You've got some breaking news of something you've just done today. | ||
| Yes, sir. | ||
| And I've known, Gail, you were at NEC or NEC. | ||
| You were at NEC? | ||
| NEC, National Economic Council in President Trump's first term. | ||
| That's right. | ||
| And then in the interim, was it Hulu or Roku? | ||
| Roku. | ||
| One of your many platforms. | ||
| One of our many platforms. | ||
| You were Roku's lawyer. | ||
| And then you've come back in and you head the antitrust division for the Justice Bar. | ||
| That's like, I mean, it's like you, Harmee, Dylan, so many people who know are these senior-level positions really running the Justice Department. | ||
| And all of us honored to be there. | ||
| Yes, fantastic. | ||
| What did you learn in your time at NEC? | ||
| I learned that in order to compete against China, we need to be in all these global races the American way. | ||
| And what I mean by that is we'll never be China by becoming more like China. | ||
| China has national champions, they have a controlled economy, et cetera, et cetera. | ||
| We win all these races, and history has taught us this too, Steve, by our free market system, by letting the ball rip, by letting companies compete, by out-innovating one another. | ||
| And the reason why antitrust matters to that picture, to the free market system, is because we're the cop on the beat at the end of the day. | ||
| We step in when competition is not working, and we ensure that markets remain competitive. | ||
| So people would say that's odd coming from the populist nationalists, the MAGA movement. | ||
| And you've been MAGA to your core, right? | ||
| You were there. | ||
| Yes, sir. | ||
| If you want to know what heavy duty was, the first term was pretty tough when we were literally surrounded. | ||
| As today, we know we're going to have posts on others on. | ||
| As, you know, looks like Brennan and Colby have a criminal investigation about Russia Gate, right? | ||
| As you know, it was kind of Fort Apache every day at the White House as we were besieged by the deep state. | ||
| How do you take in that thing about competition and what you're trying to do and breaking up these, really going after the concentration of these oligarchs with the populist nationalist movement? | ||
| Well, it's a daily task. | ||
| It's a case-by-case enforcement-led project. | ||
| We don't do policy per se. | ||
| We're law enforcers because we are cops on the beat. | ||
| And so I could talk to you about a couple of the cases that we're working on. | ||
| Our big announcement today had to do with a bid-wreaking situation down at the University of Texas in Austin. | ||
| So not everybody in Texas loves UT, I get it, but a lot of taxpayer money was being spent on the Moody Arena down in Texas, right? | ||
| The contract for services was put out to tender. | ||
| Ordinarily, you'd expect to see companies competing hard for that kind of business, right? | ||
| In Texas. | ||
| Particularly in Texas. | ||
| Well, guess what? | ||
| The companies pulled their punches, and one company was left being the sole bidder on the contract, and that involved a lot of overcharges to the good people of Texas. | ||
| And did they subcontract out to other people who should have been competing against them? | ||
| So people were spreading. | ||
| There were promises made that they would spread the wealth. | ||
| You know this from your LA days, I'm sure, Steve. | ||
| The entertainment business. | ||
| They renewed the promise. | ||
| And so you end up with one guy with all of the business. | ||
| And so today, fast forward to 2025, under President Trump's leadership, the DOJ under Pam Bondi, has been tasked with looking at the ways in which competition is not working in live entertainment in general. | ||
| So we've got consumers, we've got a lack of competition, we've got gatekeepers standing between consumers and competition and all of the good things that competition brings to consumers. | ||
| We brought a civil case against Live Nation last year under the Biden administration. | ||
| We're carrying forward with that. | ||
| That's up in the southern district of New York. | ||
| We've got 40 states, 40, 40 states standing between the state. | ||
| Is that where they're rigging the price of the tickets? | ||
| Well, so we've got a number of different allegations in that case. | ||
| Today's case is a criminal case, so different than our civil case against Live Nation. | ||
| And it's against one individual, a guy named Tim Lewicki. | ||
| I don't know if you're familiar with him, Steve. | ||
| So he was until recently the CEO of Oakview, which is one of these groups, right, that bids for this business. | ||
| And so it's a bid-rigging case. | ||
| We also have non-prosecution agreements already in place with Oakview Group and with Legends, which would have been the competitor bidding for that business. | ||
| So that's an example of the kind of thing that we're bringing to the table. | ||
| We call it MAGA antitrust. | ||
| I know you're fond of neobrandeze, and nomenclature matters to you. | ||
| It matters to us too. | ||
| So we do MAGA antitrust. | ||
| We do America-first antitrust. | ||
| What's a MAGA antitrust? | ||
| So if you're violating the antitrust laws, we're going to take a hard look. | ||
| If you're not violating the antitrust laws, we're going to get the hell out of the way. | ||
| But we're going to be cops on the beat when we see a violation. | ||
| Firm but fairly. | ||
| That hasn't been enforced in a long time, correct? | ||
| Under Biden? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| You had Lena Kahn and others. | ||
| She was at the FTC, but you had others. | ||
| They really looked the other way on this concentration of power. | ||
| That's our assessment. | ||
| It was also, frankly, President Trump's assessment towards the end of his first term, as you know. | ||
| He filed the Google search case, which we're carrying forward. | ||
| There's a through line from there through the Bidens to us today. | ||
| Talk about that because the Google case is a landmark case. | ||
| It's a landmark case. | ||
| And you've got them in one court in Northern Virginia for the search engine, or is that the advertising search? | ||
| The advertising and the search engine is in D.C.? | ||
| That's here in D.C., yeah. | ||
| That's pretty extraordinary. | ||
| You're managing two cases against probably one of the most powerful companies in the world where you bifurcated it in two different sectors to go after the two core reasons why they're monopoly. | ||
| And again, both those investigations were open during President Trump's first term, so we see this through line to today. | ||
| Biden's litigated both cases to the liability phase. | ||
| Two district courts now have found Google liable for monopolization, one here in district court in D.C. in the search engine market, and the other in this ad tech market was the technology that's used at the back end of the internet to serve ads between publishers and us. | ||
| So it's the reason that you have thousands of companies compete in different, or hundreds of companies compete in different sectors, you've got Google, you've got DuckDuckGo and Bing, and that's it? | ||
| I mean, they really had no competitor? | ||
| Yeah, I mean, our argument is that the competition in that online search market has been frozen in place for the best part of two decades now. | ||
| You've not seen movement in market shares. | ||
| You've not seen particularly robust competitors enter the market. | ||
| And so that's when the antitrust cop steps in, right? | ||
| And that's why President Trump filed the case at the end of his first term. | ||
| The media told me on Inauguration Day when he saw the oligarch sitting in back of President Trump that they were going to run the deal. | ||
| That hasn't turned out to be the case, has it? | ||
| Yeah, I mean, I don't speak for them, obviously. | ||
| There was a perception. | ||
| there was a perception at the start of the term. | ||
| What I would say is look to... | ||
| It wasn't the President Trump's narrative. | ||
| It was a media narrative. | ||
| President Trump made the personnel choices he made, and as we know, personnel is policy. | ||
| And so you have in me, a cop on the beat at the antitrust division at DOJ. | ||
| You have Chair Ferguson over at the FTC. | ||
| You have Mark Meadow over at the FTC. | ||
| And so we're doing Trump antitrust. | ||
| We're not doing Bush antitrust. | ||
| We're not doing Biden antitrust. | ||
| The pendulum swings, but we're doing Trump antitrust. | ||
| Is Trump antitrust? | ||
| Because I want to, as you know, we like the Warren Posse of nomenclature. | ||
| You have this thing called the Chicago School and you have the Neo-Brandeisian. | ||
| That's right. | ||
| Which we consider ourselves. | ||
| What is the difference? | ||
| And when we say Bush and Biden and even Obama, when you talk about the antitrust, what's the difference in Chicago school versus the neo-Brandeis? | ||
| So one we would say was under-enforcement, so that's the Bush school, right? | ||
| We would say the Bidens, in some areas, in some ways, over-enforce the law. | ||
| So I'll give you a concrete example. | ||
| One of the things we heard from Wall Street during the transition was it's very hard to get deals reviewed by the antitrust agency. | ||
| They're slow. | ||
| It's slow. | ||
| The deal flow has slowed down. | ||
| You need to build more efficiency into that review process, which we take very seriously. | ||
| And so at the front end of deals, we've speeded up the process where there is no issue with the merger. | ||
| Many mergers are benign. | ||
| They just are notified to us because they trigger a certain threshold. | ||
| We're just getting out of the way. | ||
| And we're saying, okay, you're free to close. | ||
| There's not an antitrust issue here. | ||
| We're not going to hold on to your filing just because we can, right? | ||
| At the back end of deals, one of the things I said at my confirmation hearing, different than my predecessor, was not to get too arcane but yas about nomenclature, if there's a merger that we can settle, we'll settle it. | ||
| We don't have to go to court to sue to block every merger. | ||
| That's not the game here. | ||
| And so we've already racked up three, four settlements that we think meet the competition challenge, but let the rest of the deal go forward and close. | ||
| So that's a concrete example of how we're different than the Bidens. | ||
| But at the same time, we've carried forward with these big monopolization cases we just talked about. | ||
| When people look at the populist nationalist movement and you want more competition, deconstruction, administrative state, still with a regulatory aspect to it, and people say, no, you guys speak out of two sides of your mouth because China is an existential threat and you need national champions. | ||
| We're seeing this in AI right now. | ||
| You need national champions. | ||
| I say there's more regulations to open a nail salon on Capitol Hill than there is in all artificial intelligence. | ||
| This is why the moratorium was so big to pull out. | ||
| What's your response to that? | ||
| In the world we live in today, with China doing what they're doing as a totalitarian, essentially authoritarian government versus ourselves. | ||
| How do you balance that? | ||
| This is a great question. | ||
| So you look to history. | ||
| You look to history a lot, Steve, I know. | ||
| So there's a great example of how we will win this race, any future race against China, any authoritarian regime, the American way. | ||
| So AT ⁇ T, I know a company that's dear to your heart and your family, right? | ||
| You were raised on AT ⁇ T paychecks. | ||
| So AT ⁇ T back in the day, in the 80s, right? | ||
|
unidentified
|
You're not going to talk about the breakup of AT ⁇ T. I'm going to talk about the breakup of AT ⁇ T. My dad. | |
| I know. | ||
| But this is a good news story, and this is about how we're going to win all these races against China. | ||
| So AT ⁇ T, back in the day, it's the 80s, they're getting threatened with a breakup by the Justice Department, the antitrust division, where I now work. | ||
| AT ⁇ T said, you cannot break us up. | ||
| We are a national champion. | ||
| If you break us up, we're going to lose the Cold War. | ||
| Guess what? | ||
| The Justice Department broke AT ⁇ T up. | ||
| Big burp box. | ||
| They made the baby bells. | ||
| And from that breakup, unleashed all kinds of innovations. | ||
| The first internet modem came out of AT ⁇ T, the Bell Labs, right? | ||
| The wireless industry came out of the breakup. | ||
| All these cool things happen. | ||
| Although my dad would tell you the Bell Labs were... | ||
| You get my point? | ||
| Big time. | ||
| They said we're going to lose the Cold War if you break us up. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| So all these cool things happened. | ||
| Guess what? | ||
| 1990? | ||
| Who wins the Cold War, Steve? | ||
| The good guys. | ||
| Okay, so that's the lesson from his. | ||
| We gave that victory away. | ||
| We only got a couple minutes. | ||
| When people think of the antitrust division going forward, what are you guys trying to accomplish with President? | ||
| Because President Trump, as you said, he's not the Bushes. | ||
| He's going to force it. | ||
| Being an entrepreneur businessman, what should people look forward to directionally where are you guys going to go? | ||
| Okay, so we're going to be fair cops on the beat. | ||
| We're going to do robust enforcement where it's appropriate. | ||
| If there's no issue with your deal, we're going to get the hell out of the way. | ||
| Okay, fair enough. | ||
| You brought normally bring cookies or carrot cake. | ||
| I know. | ||
| I don't want to give her location. | ||
| That's good neighbors too. | ||
| Let's say. | ||
| Gail's the den mother of the war group. | ||
| I tried to bring him a bottle of wine. | ||
| He said, I'm keeping that for Nigel Farage. | ||
| Somebody would use it. | ||
| What do you got there? | ||
| I got you a wristband. | ||
| This is a wristband that came from the Google trial team and the search case. | ||
| Hold it up so people can read it into the camera. | ||
| Is the camera pulling? | ||
| What does it say on one side? | ||
| The trial team made this wristband, and it's the adjectives, again, nomenclature matters, right, Steve, that Google used to describe our pretrial brief in that case. | ||
| And what did they say? | ||
| What is it? | ||
| They said we were reckless and dangerous. | ||
| Reckless and dangerous. | ||
| And irresponsible. | ||
| And I thought, I know just the man for that wristband. | ||
| Thank you, Steve. | ||
| Reckless, radical and dangerous. | ||
| Radical. | ||
| I've told you. | ||
| Radical and dangerous and reckless and irresponsible. | ||
| For the record, our pretrial brief was none of those things. | ||
| It was not. | ||
| It was a very responsible brief. | ||
| But you also beat the, you also beat your, you're beating the Google guys, right? | ||
| Well, I mean, we're not done yet. | ||
| We'll have to see what that is. | ||
| They're a trillion-dollar company. | ||
| They're not going to roll over. | ||
| Social media, where do people find out more about the department? | ||
| More about all of this? | ||
| Learn about Neo Brendisian versus Chicago School, your social media? | ||
| Versus America First. | ||
| Versus America MAGA. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm bringing the new name Neomaclater to the department. | |
| Brand management over at the Justice Department. | ||
| Forget that Neo Brende. | ||
| He was a Democrat, wasn't he? | ||
| A radical Democrat. | ||
| Where do people go? | ||
| So I'm at Twitterx at AAG Slater. | ||
| And my personal account is Gail A. Slater. | ||
| Gail Slater. | ||
| And there's a website over at the department. | ||
| Do we have that? | ||
| Yes, sir. | ||
| What is it? | ||
| We're at the doj.gov website. | ||
| Doj.gov, and you go to... | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Gail Slater, lovely honor. | ||
| Love you so much. | ||
| Short break. | ||
| Back in a moment. | ||
| The White House can now move forward with its plan to reduce the workforce of more than a dozen federal agencies. | ||
| This after the Supreme Court yesterday imposed an administrative stay on a lower court ruling that would have put limits on the actions that the president can take. | ||
| NBC News reports the justices made it clear that their order is not about the legality of any individual agency reduction in force or reorganization plan, only the legality of Trump's executive order and an administration memo related to workforce plans. | ||
| Justice Katanji Brown Jackson provided a written dissent in which she called the decision, quote, senseless. | ||
| Trump administration's efforts to politicize intelligence and U.S. national security. | ||
| It is also the culmination of a long and mostly fruitless nine-year campaign by Team Trump to rewrite history when it comes to Russia and the 2016 presidential election. | ||
| In the wake of furious backlash from some of Donald Trump's most prominent supporters over the Justice Department debunking their conspiracy theories about convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, not 12 hours after that happens, comes news that DOJ has launched investigations into two people Donald Trump has singled out and attacked and smeared over and over and over again. | ||
| A Justice Department spokesperson tells NBC News that officials have opened criminal investigations into both former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of the FBI Jim Comey. | ||
| The FBI declined to comment to NBC News and Jim Comey has not responded to a request for comment. | ||
| Now exactly what conduct is being investigated is unclear at this hour, but when it comes to John Brennan, who we should note is a senior national security and intelligence analyst right here at MSNBC, NBC News is reporting that his successor at the CIA, Director John Ratcliffe, made a criminal referral over John Brennan's handling of a 2017 assessment. | ||
| That assessment found with a high level of confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin aspired to help the Trump campaign. | ||
| Jack Pasovic is sitting here. | ||
| By the way, Gail Slater, that was Gail Slater's first interview here in the war room. | ||
| You know what, though, because I see her at events and I always assume that I've seen her. | ||
| I didn't realize she hadn't actually been in front of the camera before. | ||
| No, she was amazing. | ||
| She was natural. | ||
| Absolutely natural. | ||
| She's also the, she's the, she runs the deal up here in Capitol. | ||
| And it shows you the caliber of people that the Trump administration has put together in these places. | ||
| And people know I've been critical of certain elements of the DOJ lately, but when you look at the granular level, and that's what we do in the war room, I mean, these are very serious people. | ||
| Hermit, Hermit, Hermit, come on. | ||
| So, Davis, you would appreciate this. | ||
| I'm doing my Neo-Brandeisian, right? | ||
| I'm doing my Neo-Brandeisian, my Lena Khan. | ||
| Is Lena here? | ||
| She comes by the side. | ||
| She goes, no, no, no, no. | ||
| It's the MAGA antitrust brandings, everything. | ||
| You know, all the Claremont guys love Lena. | ||
| Oh, yeah. | ||
| Oh, yeah. | ||
| Big time. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh, yeah. | |
| So do we. | ||
| Mike Davis, I want to make, so today on the morning show was all deep state. | ||
| From the Epstein thing, everything. | ||
| All deep state. | ||
| And they're Pharaoh's army. | ||
| We're at war. | ||
| But the Supreme Court has backed us up in this, have they not, with this ruling? | ||
| Because I'm telling you, Weissman, the entire MSNBC thing is in the mumble tank on this announcement to the Supreme Court and on top of Brennan and Comey being under investigation. | ||
| So first, I'll start the Supreme Court. | ||
| What was actually decided? | ||
| Why are our enemies in the mumble tank on this thing about the opportunities we have with this ruling, sir? | ||
| So back in February, President Trump issued an executive order carrying out what he promised American voters he would do, which is a significant large-scale reduction in the federal workforce, right? | ||
| We have too many federal workers. | ||
| We have too many people doing jobs that don't matter to the American people. | ||
| And President Trump did the unthinkable again. | ||
| He issued an executive order and he told the Office of Personal Management and other Agencies, Office of Management and Budget, to promptly undertake preparations to initiate large-scale reductions in force rifts consistent with applicable law, right? | ||
| And so a San Francisco left-wing activist judge appointed by Clinton issued one of her temporary restraining orders on this and said that they can't even prepare to do a workforce reduction consistent with the law, meaning it's so it's just inexplicable. | ||
| Of course, the Ninth Circuit, which is left-wing, let this activist judge get away with this. | ||
| And it took several months for the Supreme Court to finally step in. | ||
| And the Supreme Court did step in, and it was eight to one. | ||
| You had Justice Katanji Brown Jackson write an idiotic dissent, and it was so idiotic that even Justice Sonia Sotomayor did not join Justice Jackson's idiotic dissent. | ||
| Again, that's how bad it was. | ||
| It's usually dueling idiotic dissents from both of them, but this was too dumb even for Sotomayor. | ||
| And now the president and his team can move forward with preparing for federal workforce reductions, which is his absolute power to do as the chief executive officer under Article II of the Constitution. | ||
| You've preached this for a long time, and President Trump went to court. | ||
| They backed it up. | ||
| Just in a practical matter, can we now go to the FBI and deconstruct the FBI? | ||
| Can we go to the CIA and start to deconstruct the CIA? | ||
| Can we do what Kerry Lake's doing at VOA and take it down to its statutory limits? | ||
| I mean, can we go into these places that we know are working against the American people and start to take out chunks, whole chunks, and really do deconstruction, not onesies, twosies, where a billet comes open and you just say, hey, I'm going to keep it open? | ||
| Because I think that's what the CIA said. | ||
| They're going to let go over a thousand people, but it's over time as billets come open, they're not going to fill them. | ||
| Can we actually go in with this ruling? | ||
| Can President Trump go in and start to take apart the deep state? | ||
| Yes, and they should. | ||
| The Trump administration should move forward. | ||
| You're going to get another activist judge issuing another temporary restraining order, which is not temporary at all. | ||
| It's going to be a preliminary injunction masquerading or a temporary restraining order. | ||
| But look, they're going to say this only applies to the preparation phase when they actually go to do it. | ||
| There's going to be another temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction. | ||
| The Trump Justice Department led by Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and Solicitor General John Sauer, they're doing a phenomenal job of taking these things aggressively to the Supreme Court and winning. | ||
| The Supreme Court is finally starting to act. | ||
| Like I said, it took two months for them to rule on this. | ||
| The Supreme Court needs to act more quickly. | ||
| This is obvious judicial sabotage by these activist judges. | ||
| These activist judges know that they can slow down the Trump administration by several months, and you'll never get back those crucial months in your four-year term. | ||
| And so the Trump administration should move forward and move forward aggressively with these reduction in force plans or rifts. | ||
| And they can do it so long as there's not a statutory hurdle for them. | ||
| So if there's a statute that says that there has to be an office, they have to keep that office. | ||
| But that doesn't mean you have to have a thousand people in that office unless the statute says so. | ||
| Okay, so I'll come to you in a second post on this, taking apart the deep state and using this as one of the tools. | ||
| Mike, also the leak that came out about, and Brennan said today on MSNBC he has not been served with anything, but the criminal investigation of Comey and Brennan, both of these hit at the same time. | ||
| Your thoughts, sir? | ||
| Well, Steve, I've been on your show. | ||
| I've been on Jack's show since the Mar-a-Lago raid constantly, hundreds of times, talking about the fact that what President Obama and Vice President Biden and Brennan and Clapper and Comey and so many others did, they politicized and weaponized law enforcement and intel agencies to go after their political enemies. | ||
| They made up the Russian collusion hoax with the Steele dossier, with Perkins Cooey. | ||
| They lied to the FISA court. | ||
| They spied on then presidential candidate Donald Trump. | ||
| They continued to spy on President Donald Trump when he was in the White House. | ||
| They ran constant lawfare against him. | ||
| They sabotaged his first term with the Russian collusion hoax. | ||
| I remember when I was in the Senate, even Senate Republicans were running around with their heads cut off because of Russian collusion. | ||
| They were convinced that Trump could have been a Russian spy because of this. | ||
| It hobbled his first term. | ||
| They continued this lawfare against President Trump when they did the Mar-a-Lago raid to get back the declassified crossfire hurricane records that President Trump declassified via presidential executive order the day before he left office. | ||
| They brought four bogus indictments against President Trump. | ||
| They tried to bankrupt him for non-fraud. | ||
| They tried to take him off the ballot. | ||
| They tried to take off his head twice when they underfunded a Secret Service and President Biden said to put a bullseye on President Trump's head. | ||
| I have been calling for accountability for this. | ||
| I've been calling for a criminal probe on this and the Justice Department. | ||
| I've been doing that for years. | ||
| You know, 4,500 media hits later. | ||
| We're finally going to get justice as we've promised on your show on Jackso. | ||
| So I would say to Comey and Clapper and Brennan and Hillary and Biden and Obama, lawyer up because justice is definitely coming. | ||
| We're pressed for time, but I got to ask you, Papadopoulos on this morning. | ||
| I said, hey, I think this may be for his perjury. | ||
| The statute of limitations run on Brennan on certain of the worst crimes, but you've got this perjury. | ||
| But Papadopoulos thinks this is a conspiracy. | ||
| They're looking at them on a criminal conspiracy charge. | ||
| Any thoughts on that before we let you go? | ||
| Statute of limitations Is not told because this is an ongoing criminal conspiracy, and the criminal conspiracy does not end until people disavow the conspiracy. | ||
| And they have not done that. | ||
| This is ongoing. | ||
| They've actually, through lying in 2022, this alleged perjury in 2022, they've actually, there's actually fraud that continues the conspiracy. | ||
| So not only have they not disavowed the conspiracy, they've actually covered up the conspiracy, which makes it ongoing. | ||
| We are clearly within the statute of limitations. | ||
| We're good. | ||
| Social media, Article 3, where do people get you, sir? | ||
| Article3project.org, article number three, project.org. | ||
| Follow us. | ||
| Donate only what you can afford and take action. | ||
| Thank you, brother. | ||
| Appreciate it. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| The subject will be with us. | ||
| We're going to Geneva and we're going out with the Washington Redskins fight song. | ||
| We'll explain it when we get back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Man. | |
| Oh, can we get? | ||
| I'll play this at the end. | ||
| It's so great to play Washington Redskins. | ||
| Hail to the Redskins. | ||
| President Trump bringing the Redskins back slowly, but surely. | ||
| Colors for with a die-hard Philadelphia Eagles fan. | ||
| Excuse me, I think you mean the Super Bowl champion Philadelphia Eagles. | ||
| Just want to make sure to fact-check you here in a word. | ||
| Oh, wow. | ||
| The Pesobic brothers from Philly. | ||
| What do you think about the Redskins coming back? | ||
| Isn't it great? | ||
| I mean, has it been officialized yet? | ||
| They're going to do the colors first. | ||
| No, 100% needs to come back. | ||
| Needs to come back. | ||
| And by the way, the fights are. | ||
| And there's other people. | ||
| And you're saying against the biggest rival, the biggest rival. | ||
| No, there's the biggest rival. | ||
| But you want to go up against the biggest rival. | ||
| If I'm an Eagles fan, right, I want the Eagles to play the Redskins. | ||
| I'm going to play the Washington Commanders. | ||
| The commies, for sure, right? | ||
| The commanders are the commies. | ||
| That's what they do. | ||
| It's ridiculous. | ||
| No, just put things the way they were. | ||
| Let's have a fair fight, and we will beat you every time, RG3 or not, because we got Jalen Hurts, all right? | ||
| We got Saquon. | ||
| We got the Red Spring. | ||
| You go down. | ||
| Bring it to go down. | ||
| The team's coming back to Capitol Hill. | ||
| It's going to go right back to RFK. | ||
| But now they have to get rid of the current one, right? | ||
| Yes, unfortunately. | ||
| I'm sure Priscilla. | ||
| You need to keep the name. | ||
| You need to keep it. | ||
| The new RFK. | ||
| I would actually keep the stadium. | ||
| It's an eyesore at this point. | ||
| It's ready down. | ||
| Okay, a couple of things. | ||
| Questions. | ||
| Does the ruling in the Supreme Court give us now the ability, no excuses, to go after the deep state in big hunks and deconstruct some? | ||
| It's a green light. | ||
| I mean, this is the green light for the deconstruction crew to go over there to the deep state, wherever they are, wherever they are, offices, chapter, converse, just paul. | ||
| Can you stop bitching and moaning? | ||
| Because you're bitching. | ||
| I got clips of, I get to play clips of Jack Pasobic on Dana Bash on CNN, but we won't because you used the H-word. | ||
| But you're bitching and slowing down. | ||
| I used the biggest slur in all of MAGA. | ||
| Hillary. | ||
| You're bitching and moaning and whining all the time. | ||
| Now you've got a criminal investigation on Brennan and Comey, and you're an IC guy, so you got two of the worst. | ||
| Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. | ||
| The moaning, the crying, the ranting. | ||
| I mean, nobody in a war room ever does that. | ||
| What the adjectives again? | ||
| What's the adjectives you got on a wristband there? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Reckless and irresponsible, radical and dangerous. | |
| The guy with the wristband. | ||
| No, it's a look. | ||
| Look, because Steve, there's a phrase that they use online, all right? | ||
| And they use it to refer to you, and they say, when in doubt, chimp out. | ||
| When in doubt, chimp out. | ||
| Always chimp. | ||
| Do you think this is real? | ||
| I think it's 100% real. | ||
| Do you think there's a grand jury that's been impaneled that's hearing this stuff? | ||
| I'm hearing things, and I'll leave it at that. | ||
| And look, look, look. | ||
| When Mike Davis comes up there and says it's real, you could take that to the bank because Mike Davis has come up time and time again to tell us when stuff wasn't real, has made us take our vitamins and ate our veggies, even when we don't want. | ||
| And that guy's more plugged into this system than anybody in the world. | ||
| And so when he says it's real, it's real. | ||
| Now, I understand, Brendan. | ||
| Brendan, by the way, that's a slam-dunk case of perjury, okay? | ||
| Slam-dunk case of perjury, lying to Congress. | ||
| It was under, by the way, and there's multiple, right? | ||
| It's not just the dossier. | ||
| You can go back to when he said. | ||
| But the lie guy said the statute of limits is run out, but Davis just clarified it, which is my theory of the case. | ||
| As long as the conspiracy is going on as a result of the business. | ||
| As long as there's an ongoing conspiracy and it's not broken. | ||
| By the way, you can go ask Doug Mackey about that because that was the whole evidence. | ||
| It was conspiracy. | ||
| Have they should have been? | ||
| But they couldn't prove the conspiracy. | ||
| They got to prosecute the prosecutors and the judge ought to be impeached. | ||
| No evidence on Mackey. | ||
| No, not at all. | ||
| And so with Comey, you know, with Comey, I want to see, I haven't seen this specific charge yet that we have to come down. | ||
| So there's serious, obviously, a number of times, though. | ||
| And by the way, I identified something very early on when your good friend Peter Baker in the New York Times called me a conspiracy theorist for saying this, that James Comey once said under oath early on in the Trump administration that he never felt any pressure to shut down an investigation. | ||
| All right. | ||
| And I remember this all the way back 2017. | ||
| And Peter Baker wrote me up with this. | ||
| Oh, it's all this crazy conspiracy. | ||
| Wait a minute. | ||
| Then he goes back later in May. | ||
| You know what he said? | ||
| He said, I felt pressured to shut down the Russia investigation. | ||
| I said, well, wait a minute. | ||
| Here's your testimony from the first time. | ||
| And you said no pressure. | ||
| A second time you said pressure. | ||
| So which is it? | ||
| Let's go to Geneva. | ||
| We got Noor bin Laden and Joe Allen at the, what is it, AI make happy? | ||
| It's like we're going to feel better because the United Nations. | ||
| So Noor bin Laden, Jack and I have been waiting for this one all day. | ||
| What's your assessment of day two of the conference? | ||
| Great to be with you guys this evening, evening here, afternoon for you guys. | ||
| Day two was equally as interesting as yesterday. | ||
| And it's a jam-packed schedule of big hitters, big names, but also just very key topics that we mentioned yesterday when it comes to specifically disinformation and misinformation. | ||
| I mentioned the global risk report from the World Economic Forum that comes out every January with misinformation and disinformation being the number one threat in the world according to all those globalist institutions. | ||
| In the background of this UN conference on AI, you have the UN's own global risks report, which came out this week as well, their very first one, where again, misinformation and disinformation is the number one vulnerability in the world, according to them. | ||
| And today I picked up at the Google booth this brochure entitled Determining Trustworthiness Through Context and Provenance. | ||
| And it's all about how in the age of AI, it's going to be absolutely critical for people to know where the information is coming from. | ||
| And as I mentioned on the show yesterday, Steve, we're going to see an increasing clampdown on our freedom of speech online. | ||
| And if you look further down the pipeline, I think what is coming is actually the end of online anonymity. | ||
| This is what they want, right? | ||
| They want to tie in the digital ID, online verification, and end online anonymity. | ||
| And you remember, Nikki Haley, Nimrata, had called for this actually when she was, I think, running for president. | ||
| I mean, if that even was a thing back then with her failed campaign. | ||
| But you have quite heavy, I mean, big names in politics, in tech, in those globalist institutions actually preparing this narrative, the dangers of AI, the dangers of deep fakes in order to push this agenda through. | ||
| Well, so, and this is a question for both of you, but so earlier this morning, U.S. time, we saw the resignation of the head of X, the head of Twitter, and many people believe that this is in relation to Grok and the flare-up from Grok yesterday posting Hitler quotes, posting a series of things that really just kind of switching into a completely different mode. | ||
| Well, tell them they're all powerful. | ||
| You can't do anything about it. | ||
| That's what's scared. | ||
| And well, part of it was they weren't even able to turn it off. | ||
| They had to put it into image-only mode. | ||
| They had to take away text mode, so it made it image-only. | ||
| I have to ask, though, at the conference, you know, has all of this massive international news regarding ROC, has that been a topic of discussion? | ||
| Are they trying to keep it quiet? | ||
| You had major CEO resignation over it, or is it something they're trying to just kind of brush under the rug? | ||
| Well, I'll say, Jack, you know, you and I both remember Tay, and Tay lives. | ||
| Oh, yeah. | ||
| Tay lives. | ||
| Tay was reincarnated. | ||
| For the audience, if you recall back in 1717, Microsoft tried to create a chatbot trained on Twitter, and it was, to say the least, impolite in its observing of various topics regarding Twitter, Hitler, or men and women, or the races. | ||
| So what you saw with Grok is, I think, probably an attempt at breaking open the guardrails and allowing the LLM to simply follow the statistical models of what it is trained on, which in the case of Twitter, Musk opened up Twitter to free speech, which meant bringing in a lot of people who speak, to put it mildly and impolitely. | ||
| Hang on, hang on. | ||
| Hang on. | ||
| I hear all that. | ||
| I hear all that. | ||
| But it's the conference. | ||
| You guys, you're with all the leaders in the world. | ||
| They've paid the most public of all the things. | ||
| And it had a meltdown where the CEO, I think the CEO resigned for a couple of things. | ||
| Number one, what he's been saying about President Trump and other people, the political party, he's out of control. | ||
| You know, the nanny left. | ||
| She's afraid of liability. | ||
| But the Grok thing is the Grok thing is shocking in the fact they pitch you on, oh, it's just a path to artificial general intelligence. | ||
| This thing is demonic. | ||
| If you look at it, it looks like a demon and you can't stop it. | ||
| And it's also kind of saying it's all powerful. | ||
| That's the other thing. | ||
| It's in your face like you can't do anything about it. | ||
| So are they in Geneva? | ||
| Are they addressing this issue at all that this thing is so dangerous and you have it in hands of kids, sir? | ||
| A thousand percent they're addressing it. | ||
| But the way that they're addressing it is to say that these are the dangers of artificial intelligence. | ||
| They're upfront about all of that. | ||
| They're not saying that artificial intelligence is going to lead to utopia. | ||
| They're mostly pointing out, even if it's called AI for good, they're pointing out a lot of the dangers of AI. | ||
| AI is going to be racist. | ||
| AI is going to be sexist. | ||
| AI is going to be homophobic. | ||
| AI is going to create massive economic divides. | ||
| And so what they are proposing, and when I say they, it's a broad spectrum of opinions, but the general thrust is that if we put in place global standards, perhaps even global treaties, perhaps even binding legislation across borders, then we'll be able to protect people from hearing racist posts from Grok, or we'll be able to protect people from deepfakes generated by Google image generation. | ||
| So they talk continuously about the dangers, as I think they should, but their solutions are entirely global and governmental. | ||
| So Nor, shouldn't I feel comfortable being put to bed by what they're telling me in Geneva that they're going to take care of all these problems with the evilness and the demonic nature of AI, ma'am? | ||
| Why are you guys looking at it with such a jaundice and being so mean? | ||
| No, listen, to bounce off of Joe's point, which was absolutely correct. | ||
| They are focusing on this, quote, AI divide. | ||
| And in perfect UN parlance and in UN strategy and narrative building, they are using the excuse, you know, of these poor nations or developing nations not having access to all of this infrastructure and that the digital divide is going to be further exasperated, heightened, and now it's turning into this AI divide and all those countries are going to be left behind. | ||
| So it's always the same playbook about wanting to help the poorer nations when, in fact, it's just a way to deploy more and more of this technology in order to connect the entire world and better track, better map, better surveil the entire world. | ||
| So they're focusing or highlighting all of these issues, but the objective and the goals in addressing those issues are very much further centralization. | ||
| I see it. | ||
| I see what that is. | ||
| Steve, that's why we need more AI and more power because of the issues. | ||
| You see the play here? | ||
| Is Zuckerberg the same thing? | ||
| We're going to go to break. | ||
| Hang on. | ||
| The reason we had to take Joe Allen from out, he was in the wilds of Wyoming going to these AI conferences up in Montana. | ||
| We had to take him and put him on a plane to get to Geneva to assist and work with Noor because this conference is so big. | ||
| Because my understanding is the last time we sent you to Switzerland, you were put under arrest. | ||
| Can you even get back in the country? | ||
| I may have been charges in Switzerland. | ||
| So we got to sign up. | ||
| Noor's sitting there freezing in the snow doing a report, and you're like in a cafe, and you're getting rounded up by the police. | ||
| Tanya, I'm going to have Interpol coming in on me, just guilt by association. | ||
| Inside the cafe. | ||
| No, then they pull the MP5s up. | ||
| Tanya's on the other side with my brother. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Why? | |
| Because she wanted to go see Lee Schreiber. | ||
| And my brother was out looking for Malcolm Nance. | ||
| I sent him on a mission of trying to find Malcolm Nance with Zielinski because Zielinski was with Jonathan Swan at the thing. | ||
| And then I'm getting arrested. | ||
| They say, what's going on? | ||
| I think Jackson Trump. | ||
| Well, we got to go. | ||
| Are you allowed back in the country? | ||
| That is indeterminate. | ||
| I think, yeah, exactly. | ||
| That's where we have Joe Allen. | ||
| Okay, we're taking a short. | ||
| Take a short commercial break. | ||
| Joe Allen, Nor Bin Laden, in Geneva at the AI for Good United Nations Conference. | ||
| Posos in the war room. | ||
| Birch Gold, take your phone out. | ||
| Ban a text. | ||
| Banan. | ||
|
unidentified
|
B-A-N-N-O-N-989898. | |
| More than ever, you need to know about the ultimate guide for gold in the Arrow Trump. | ||
| There's my Redskins right there. | ||
| Hailed with the Redskins. | ||
| Suck on that, Eagles. | ||
|
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| We're going to get to, they're trying to run Bridge Colby out of the Defense Department. | ||
| We're going to defend that. | ||
| Posta is going to be with me in a minute. | ||
| Noor bin Laden, give me a couple of minutes on your summary of where we stand on day two, ma'am. | ||
| Day two, as I mentioned, was again a lot about all of this information, misinformation and disinformation and how to tackle the, how would you say, the control of information online. | ||
| There was a lot of talk about education as well and AI education in particular with lots of countries like Mongolia, Estonia continuing on the digitization path and introducing AI classes in middle schools and high schools. | ||
| So that was a big focus today, the education and obviously hand in hand with GovTech. | ||
| I've done a lot of research on that and wrote an article on GovTech specifically two years ago. | ||
| That was a central theme and is a central theme this week of how all public services are being completely digitized thanks to AI. | ||
| Google as well had several prospect like brochures about that and how to assist governments worldwide into digitizing with AI. | ||
| Let's break up Google. | ||
| We just had Gail Slayer to start the show. | ||
| Nora, social media, where do folks go to follow you and get your writings, ma'am? | ||
| NorbinLaden.substack.com, Norbin Laden on X Twitter. | ||
| And for more information about the digitization of our society, you can also head to this website entitled antimatters.world. | ||
| And Joe, I believe, is wearing a hoodie. | ||
| So Joe, you can show as the best model for what we've been working on. | ||
| Antimatters.world. | ||
| Antimatters. | ||
| He's got merch. | ||
| Joe, what do you got for us? | ||
| So, Steve, Nora is absolutely right about the basically assumption that AI is the future of everything. | ||
| Education, medicine, the military, government, corporate life, everything. | ||
| The tension is between those who say that that means that we're doomed and those who say that AI will be for good, that we will be able to harness this and create more intelligent humans, healthier humans. | ||
| We heard from David Sinclair of Harvard that maybe we'll even use AI to reverse aging by way of epigenetics. | ||
| So there is that tension there, though. | ||
| There are the people here, Jeffrey Hinton, Roman Yampolsky, who say that, no, maybe this is going to be a massive nightmare. | ||
| I think when the audience sees some of the interviews we've been conducting, especially with the robots and especially with the cyborgs, they'll get a little taste of the future that they're talking about. | ||
| Both the doom and the promise. | ||
| Tomorrow, when we get to Tampa for the Charlie Kirk, this major student action summit, we're going to play two of the major interviews by Joe. | ||
| Joe, where do they go on social media to get you, sir? | ||
| At J-O-E-B-O-T-X-Y-Z and joebot.xyz. | ||
| And I think they'll really look forward to Noor's relationship with a robot now, Nadine, but I'll leave it at that. | ||
| I don't want to throw shade on Noor. | ||
| No, I better not be snaked by a robot. | ||
| I would really be upset. | ||
| Regenerative robotics. | ||
| Noor bin Laden. | ||
| Joe Allen. | ||
| Thank you guys from Geneva. | ||
| Late night. | ||
| Thank you very much, Steve. | ||
| Bridge Colby. | ||
| They're coming for Bridge Colby. | ||
| And they're coming for Bridge Colby because the Israel First Crowd. | ||
| Plus, he wants to keep his eyes on the bottom. | ||
| Here's what's going on. | ||
| I think they're trying to do a bank shot right now. | ||
| So if you go and watch MSNBC right now, what are they doing? | ||
| It's the two-minute tape, but they're not focused on Bridge. | ||
| They're focused on Pete. | ||
| So they're focusing on Pete. | ||
| They say Pete went rogue. | ||
| They're going to say Pete Hagseth went rogue. | ||
| They're saying it was Hagethethethethethett. | ||
| It's about stopping the shipment of Patriot missile batteries and others to Ukraine. | ||
| Well, and what it really is, though, is an audit of what's going on and an assessment of what our military stockpiles are to defend places. | ||
| Because we've committed, right? | ||
| We've committed to the defense, and we talk about On Warham all the time, to the defense of the Pacific, the defense of the Red Sea, the defense of all of our bases in the Middle East, which required Patriot missiles during that response from Iran on Qatar And Al-Adid and all of these other areas. | ||
| But we've still got to commit to the defense of that little place called the American homeland. | ||
| And the Patriot missile batteries are currently very low because we've been sending them to Israel. | ||
| We've been sending them to Ukraine. | ||
| We've sended them all this. | ||
| That's why we warned everyone: don't do this. | ||
| The reason they hate Bridge is that Bridge is the pivot to Asia guy. | ||
| He wants to not focus on the Middle East and wars in the Middle East and get out of the wars in the Middle East. | ||
| And he wants to get out of Ukraine. | ||
| Tomorrow at 6 o'clock, the Taiwan ambassador will be in the war room, and I will be interviewing him. | ||
| So stick around for 6 o'clock tomorrow. | ||
| Big special with. | ||
| Well, ambassador. | ||
| Ambassador could only come from another nation, right, Steve? | ||
| Well, in the war room, we call him an ambassador because it is a nation. | ||
| It's not a province. | ||
| How big a deal? | ||
| Gordon Chang's got a, real quickly, Gordon Chang's got a piece up saying she's losing control of the military. | ||
| You buy that? | ||
| We'll see, Steve. | ||
| It's been rumored for many years. | ||
| Xi Jinping's downfall has been rumored since the day that he took office in 2012. | ||
| And it's something where, look, has there been a shake-up within the PLA generals? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| But the question is, it's too hard to see. | ||
| And the thing that I've been looking for, Steve, if you're going to see an actual reduction in the power of Xi Jinping, and I go and look at Chinese media, you would see the emergence, number one, of criticism of his policies, which you have not seen. | ||
| Very first episode of War Room, that's exactly what I talked about. | ||
| The mandate of heaven, the dynastic cycle of history. | ||
| And number two, where is the heir? | ||
| There's no heir apparent that's been identified in any way. | ||
| So this idea that, oh, there's a coup and Napolet bro is going to reassert control, it's enticing to want to think about that, but I'm just not seeing it. | ||
| Not quite yet. | ||
| Michael. | ||
|
unidentified
|
He just did it to the dual employment. | |
| Give me the social media. | ||
| At Jack Pesobic, Human Events Daily. | ||
| And it's crazy. | ||
| And Jack was all over CNN today using the H-word playing the Redskins. | ||
| By the way, Minnesota Vikings fan playing hail to the Redskins. | ||
| Trump's bringing the Redskins back. | ||
| Mike Lindell, you're going to sell me a set of sheets, sir? | ||
| Absolutely, guys. | ||
| This is it. | ||
| A few hours left. | ||
| This is it for the warroom powsey. | ||
| So many were allotted. | ||
| I extended it. | ||
| 29.88. | ||
| Any size, any color, just a few hours left. | ||
| This is the last day, everybody. | ||
| 29.88. | ||
| As many as you want, but this is it. | ||
| Any size, any color, promo code warroom. | ||
| Go to the website. | ||
| Go down, click on Steve. | ||
| They're made in the USA, the Minecrofts, all the stuff that's there that's still on sale from the fourth. | ||
| We're going to leave it on sale today for tonight only. | ||
| And we lowered down. | ||
| If you only buy $75 or more, you get $150 worth of free digital gifts today. | ||
| I added that just for this show tonight. | ||
| 800-873-1062. | ||
| Call my operators and take advantage of the last day, everybody. | ||
| Promo code Marbro. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Thank you, brother. | ||
| By the way, Posto, thank you for dropping by in the neighborhood. | ||
| Gail Slater, the audience wants, we're going to get more Gail Slater back here, head of antitrust over DOJ. | ||
| I'm going to stick around for the six o'clock hour. | ||
| We've got Liz Jora, Ben Harnwell, Cannon 212, John Henry Weston out at LifeSight News. | ||
| We're going to make a big deal about that because it is a big deal to be made about it. | ||
| Short break. |
Export Selection