All Episodes
Previous Next
July 16, 2025 - Bannon's War Room
48:54
Episode 4635: Where We Stand Heading Into 2026 And The Midterms
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I don't think it's a long time.
I think really the question should be asked, why did Biden get us into that ridiculous war?
Why did Biden bring us there?
That should never ever have happened, that war.
This is Biden's war.
I'm just trying to end it because we're saving a lot of lives.
Why do you think his opinion will change in 50 days when it hasn't for the last time?
Oh, a lot of opinions change very rapidly.
Might not be 50 days.
It might be much sooner than 50 days.
When do you think the first picture of missiles some of these weapons that are out there?
They're already being shipped.
From what country?
They're coming in from Germany and then replaced by Germany, and in all cases, the United States gets paid back in full.
So what's happening, as you know, is the European Union, if you look, mostly European Union stuff, but let's put it in the form of NATO.
It's very similar.
But NATO is going to pay us back for everything.
In some cases, we're going to be paid back by countries of the European Union directly.
But we're always getting our money back in full.
So we're not going to have any more investment to make.
We're getting our money back in full.
And if we can make a deal, that would be great.
We're saving 5,000 or 6,000 soldiers a week.
They're Russian and they're Ukrainian soldiers.
They're not American soldiers.
And we won't have boots on the ground.
But it's a shame.
5,000.
Last week they say 7,100 soldiers, both Russian and Ukraine, were killed.
You urge people to move on, but I'm curious, why do you think your supporters in particular have been so interested in the Epstein story?
I don't know.
I don't understand about how it's been handled.
I don't understand why they would be so interested.
He's dead for a long time.
He was never a big factor in terms of life.
I don't understand what the interest or what the fascination is.
I really don't.
And the credible information's been given.
Don't forget, we went through years of the Mueller witch hunt and all of the different things to steal Dossier, which was all fake.
All that information was fake.
But I don't understand why the Jeffrey Epstein case would be of interest to anybody.
It's pretty boring stuff.
It's sordid, but it's boring.
And I don't understand why it keeps going.
I think, well, really only pretty bad people, including fake news, want to keep something like that going.
But credible information, let them give it.
Anything that's credible, I would say let them have it.
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 lie?
MAGA 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.
Here's your host, Stephen K. Vance.
Wednesday, 16th of July, year of our Lord 2025.
I believe we're going to have a press available with the president starting at 11.
I think the head of Bahrain is going to be there, which used to be the old where the naval base was in the Persian Gulf, or I guess now called the Arabian Gulf.
They're going to have a bylat.
And before the bylats start, we're hearing that there's going to be a press available.
We'll be covering that live.
Our own Brian Glenn will be there.
So we'll cut into 11 o'clock earlier, but it should be some fascinating things going on.
A lot of geopolitics, capital markets today.
Financial Times of London has finally admitted that our tariff policy is working.
They said no one except for the Chinese really has kind of punched back on it.
This is why either one or two things are happening.
People are trying to set up operations here in the United States to manufacture and investing here, or we're toning the cash, and I think they say $50 billion.
People are talking about $110 billion in tariff revenues.
So a lot of talk about economy and tariffs a day that are working.
I want to start with.
Also, we're going to now kick off talking about the midterms, and particularly as we did it last time and the way we won, you've got to really think through, are these districts correct?
And the great Alex deGros will join us shortly to talk about Texas and Ohio.
I want to go to Richard Barris.
First of all, Richard, we had Mark Mitchell last night on from Rasmussen.
He talked about, I want to start with you.
He talked about a new coalition or new alliance that you and Mitchell are working on to make sure that we get as accurate as polling as possible.
You guys and the other people I think you were bringing in have a history of understanding the MAGA movement, of how to ask the questions, of how to look at the demographics, how to break it down.
Tell us about that first because we want to make sure the audience understands.
This is a big effort of people that are the top pollsters and really have been shunted by the mainstream media, but are really much more accurate in pinpointing at any point in time where MAGA is and particularly where the country is aligned with MAGA.
So walk us through the alliance first.
Well, thanks for having me as always, Steve.
And I mean, you just said it, that word accurate.
I mean, that's what this comes down to.
We started the National Association of Independent Pollsters because in the last 10 years plus, you know, the polling industry has had issues for a while.
It's just really exacerbated in the Trump era.
We've had all these debates about how the polling industry has changed and how it has evolved.
But sadly, a lot of people have used those debates to malign others and to bury what really matters, which is the accuracy of public pollsters.
That is our true value to the public.
And if we're not accurate, there is no trust.
And without trust, George Gallup's vision completely falls apart.
Why would elected officials listen to us, Steve, when they're debating whether or not to support public policy?
Why would the voters trust us at all when it comes to our take on who is or isn't ahead or going to win an election?
I mean, it becomes a weapon, you know, a tool for people with sinister motives.
And there isn't a group out there until now, there isn't a group that serves as a bit of a gauge for the American public and for lawmakers to say, look, these people have got it right.
These people know what they're doing.
Motive be damned.
It doesn't matter what the motive is, Steve.
All that matters is that they were right or they were wrong.
So somebody needs to be there to serve as that gauge to be able to tell people you can trust the results of these pollsters or you can't.
And that's what we started.
It's big.
I'm excited about it.
It includes myself, Mark Mitchell, Ras Mussen, Robert Cahaley at Trafalgar, and Matt Towery over at Insider Advantage.
You have got to have a long and proven track record of success and accuracy.
We all get it wrong sometimes, right?
I mean, that's going to happen.
But you cannot be wrong every election, cycle in, cycle out, beyond the rule of outlier.
You have to be accurate.
And this has been a challenging period for polling.
And if you've done a good job during this period, the Trump era, Nana, then hands off, you know, hats off to you.
And, you know, welcome aboard.
So it's Rasmussen, Trofager, Richard Barris, Big Data, and Insider Advantage.
Once again, what was the criteria for selecting the four foundational members of this?
You have to have a track record, a published track record of accuracy over a period of time.
You know, there's a lot of, I have a saying, and I think viewers need to take this to heart.
In this era, there are a whole lot of polls, but there aren't as many pollsters.
You know, we have too many polls, not enough pollsters.
There's a new poll popping up every week, Steve.
And, you know, when this industry got kicked off, that was not the case.
It was Gallup.
Maybe a couple of news organizations did their thing, but George Gallup had the gold standard.
And for decades, we dealt with that.
And the information era has its benefits, but it also has, you know, it also has its downsides.
And that's one of them, the springing up of pollsters, cycle in and cycle out, who then vanish later, come back under a new assumed name, Steve, because their track record was awful the year prior or their cycle prior.
And there's nobody watching out for this.
Well, there is now.
And that's the point of this project.
Your big data, you have a different angle of attack on polling.
The other three are more traditional in the George Gallup school.
Obviously, they feel they're more precise.
They have a track record, but you come at this totally differently.
Walk our audience through that.
What's the difference?
Well, I'm a big believer that a lot of public polls, you know, of course, there are people who are malicious out there, and that's sad, but it is the reality.
But I got into this years ago and immediately, you know, my shtick was that response bias was the primary determination of a lot of these wrong calls.
It was the primary factor.
So it's not that public opinion shifts as much as people think it does or what public, you know, if you follow public polls month and month, it looks like public opinion is moving a lot.
In truth, most of the time, not all of the time, but most of the time, the difference is really because the pollster is talking to different groups of people.
And those changes and those errors are really artifacts of how the poll is designed and how the poll is conducted and how the data is collected.
There are various forms of response biases and very few pollsters understand how to identify them and then to shield against it if you do identify it.
And big data is basically built off of the assumption that that is true, which I know it is.
We all do now.
When I first started to argue that it wasn't widely understood, it is now.
But there are, and I don't want to give away the secret sauce here, but if you look at larger numbers of people in the era of declining response rates, if you look at larger numbers of people and you make sure you know exactly who you're talking to month in and month out, then it's bigger is better in polling.
Let me put it that way.
All right.
Without giving away too much, bigger is better.
So that's why that reflects our name.
Talk to me about, you've done, we had Mark Mitchell on last night.
He was pretty adamant about these numbers recently.
President Trump, who should be peaking given all the, you know, President Trump today went through a whole litany of successes, and they're pretty extraordinary.
We're also folks covering, talking to the OMB guys, covering this, which could be a significant vote in the Senate about shutting down or basically defunding PBS and NPR a billion dollars each, plus the rest of the package, the rescissions package.
So he's got victory after victory, but the poll numbers don't show that, right?
At least with Mark Mitchell Rasmussen, what do you show?
He's exactly right.
This should be a period, especially during the summer, where Americans, they're doing their own thing.
They're really only paying attention to big news items.
The passage of that bill is a big news item.
Within the bill, there are a lot of popular provisions, but the White House did lose the messaging war on this bill.
I mean, it's very clear.
And that's the press release we have out today will show that.
And we're also releasing more.
I'll talk to you about those results now.
We also asked about the economy and various items in the economy and what the president's been focusing on.
And the overall theme, Steve, is this.
A lot of his successes are being stepped on or overshadowed by unpopular things that are going on.
Fair or not, is irrelevant.
All that matters is the optics and what the voters see and their sentiment and how they feel.
They feel that the president should have been, you know, I mean, let me put it this way.
60 years, best wage growth in 60 years being stepped on by another intervention in the Middle East that very few people wanted any part of whatsoever.
We had a lot of other economic data.
Then the bill gets passed, right?
And it's just one thing after another that is not being celebrated and not being touted.
Democrats were able to make a lot of people concerned over Cuts to Medicaid and other programs in the big beautiful bill.
And in order to effectively rebut the messaging from the Democrats, you had to be laser focused.
But they were not laser focused.
They were talking about this with Netanyahu, this one with that one.
Now we're going to arm Ukrainians.
I mean, Steve, I don't have to explain this to you.
I'm doing this for the benefit of the viewers.
I mean, this is not popular.
These things are not popular.
Tax on tips, no tax on tips is popular, right?
Last weekend was the anniversary of Donald Trump surviving an assassination attempt.
This should have been a day of celebration.
Instead, it was being stepped on by how they mishandled the more than that.
Not only how they mishandled the Epstein situation, but then how they actually started to browbey voters for being anyone who was concerned over how they mishandled this.
So the bottom line is, you can't keep peeling off little parts of your base and then expect your numbers to stay strong.
You're going to keep peeling five there and end up in a bad spot.
And you can end up with apathy and complacency.
Hang on for one second.
I'm going to hold you through the break.
The general thesis is that his accomplishments on the economic side are so powerful.
And if you look at the underlying data, the messaging is not there to put that to the forefront.
And the message discipline is there meandering all over other things that people didn't vote for or are confused about.
Is that your central thesis?
Steve, that's the gist of it.
100%.
Okay, hang on.
Okay, hang on.
We're going to take a short commercial break.
Take your phone out.
Text Bannon, B-A-N-N-O-N at 989898.
That takes you to Birch Gold, the Philip Patrick and the team.
You heard Philip last night walking through what the Bricks are doing on the de-dollarization movement.
President Trump is not happy about that.
Find out why gold and precious metals are an investment opportunity in the age of Trump.
Warup, here's your host, Stephen K. Battle.
Okay, we got DeGrasse about Texas on deck, and we got Tom Fitton about the CIA and this, hopefully this huge investigation that's going to be going on and maybe kick off with a special counsel.
Fitton will join us here shortly.
I want to finish with Richard Barris.
I mean, Barris, isn't the problem that you have the core base of MAGA, and particularly these people, they come out for Trump.
They're associated with the Trump movement.
They support President Trump.
But if they get cynical, if they get complacent, if they get apathetic and don't turn out, we have a massive problem in 2026 and beyond, right?
This is one of the reasons I've been, hey, Trump 28, because we have not yet proven we can turn out certain low propensity, low information voters unless President Trump's on top of the ticket.
What are your thoughts particularly about what your polling shows you?
Too few voters, I mean, too few Republicans understand that.
Too few people in this space understand that the number one priority for the Republican Party had to be to get the voter that they, voters, there are several groups that they underperform with compared to Donald Trump.
They have to bring them into the fold.
Some of them haven't even been flirting with voting Republican.
They left spaces blank in districts like California 13, where Duarte went down, but Donald Trump carried the district, right?
You look at statewide races like Mike Rogers.
He went down with Trump on the ballot, Steve.
So the situation for them is a little bit more dire than they understand.
The redistricting effort did not go well.
And that's why the ones that are in process right now moving forward are that important.
Because as it stands right now, the voter groups where Donald Trump is now himself starting to hurt with, those are the ones that Republicans needed to bring into the fold.
And just from the polling this month, here are a couple of groups that need to really stand out in people's minds.
18 to 29 who voted for Donald Trump.
Some of his biggest decline this month came from that group.
Hispanic men.
All right.
The groups where he did increase are kind of funny, Steve.
Those who have a four-year degree or more, right?
And that's great.
Perfect.
That helped offset some of the decline with his core voter and his 24 base.
But it doesn't matter because they're still voting Democrat at the generic ballot by 10 points.
So, I mean, it just, it's like a pointless bump that's going to evaporate in a month or two anyway, even if it lasts that long.
They're just happy he bombed Iran for now, to be honest.
And they'll go back to disapproving of him.
And what will be left is a weakened base.
And that is something that people aren't understanding while they're, again, you know, attempting to browbeat all of these different groups into submission.
18 to 29 year olds don't care about what's going on all the way around the other side of the world.
They didn't vote for him for that.
I mean, it's just the reality that people are going to have to start to face.
You know, moving, look what happened in 22.
Republicans actually did win the House vote in 22, but they still lost control.
You know, going forward in 24, there were very important areas from California to New Jersey, all around the country, New York, seats in New York State, where Donald Trump outperformed the Republicans down ballot.
They're simply out of time.
They can't afford to continue to carry on with business as usual.
They had to convince these voters that they were becoming more like Donald Trump, not that Donald Trump was becoming more like them.
They're out of time.
I mean, so there are all these people, you know, the clapping seals and the rest of them, they're going to clap their way right into an utter defeat.
I mean, that's the reality.
I mean, I'm not a sugarcoater.
You know me better than that, Steve.
That is the situation.
And by the way, this month, Democrats took lead on the generic ballot for the first time in our polling since Donald Trump's second presidency began.
Barris, where can people go to get all your analysis and everything over Big Data and hear your podcast?
Where do they go?
We're everywhere, but the best place is on locals, peoplespundin.locals.com.
You'll find, you know, inside the numbers there.
You'll find it all there.
The public polling project, which is how we do this, which is support from you guys on bigdatapoll.com.
Go check it out.
But locals is definitely the central hub for all things people's pondin.
Peoplespundin.locals.com.
There it is.
Richard Barris.
Thanks, brother.
Appreciate you starting off the show today.
Fantastic.
Anytime.
All the best.
Alex deGrasse.
Alex deGrasse, given that we're focused on Texas and Ohio, is this a bailout plan because we're nervous about 2026, or is this something logical we should be doing anyway, sir?
No, this is logical.
I mean, we have to force the issue and make advancements however we can and play the Democrats' game, of course, Steve.
We want fair lines, but we want to take advantage of the law and equal representation.
And so if there's the legal way to do this, then obviously, why wouldn't we, of course, right?
We have an obligation to the country to ensure that we make the gains that we can legally.
And so you're looking at two.
Maybe they could force the issue to three.
My advice would be take what we can get and not try to overextend where you might get jammed in court.
I think that those that have kind of gamed out the arms race on this, people that are very focused on this within the party have gamed out that, hey, actually, this, if we fight this out, you've got California looking to make a move.
I'm sure you'll see New York, other folks that, you know, they had been so aggressive in the past that there's less they could probably squeeze than we can.
So it'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
But we're looking at five in Texas, of course.
I was looking at some proposed maps that give us 30 seats where Trump won by 20 plus in Texas and you'd flip five, giving the Democrats eight seats.
Hold it, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on.
You were looking at there's 20 potential.
You're saying there's 20 potential in Texas?
20 potential that could be redistributed or is that?
Five pickups where Trump won by 20%.
So, you know, safe hotels.
Okay, got it.
Got it.
Five pickups.
So you've got Texas 7.
Do you have any idea?
Yep.
Yeah, I've got the numbers.
You can move Texas 7 from Democrat 20 to Republican 20.
You can move Texas 28 from Republican 7 to Republican 21 very easily without drawing any incumbents in with each other.
You can move Texas 29 from a Democrat 20 to a Republican 20, give or take.
Same thing with Texas 32, Democrat 23 to Republican like 25 even.
And you could move Texas 34 from being a Trump by four points to like 21.
And then you could shore up some of these seats, 15, 23, 24, that were about Trump by 16.
You can move them up four or five points.
You'll leave Democrats with two seats in Houston, two seats in Dallas, two seats in Austin, a seat in San Antonio and El Paso.
You have this question I was going to ask, you see the demographic shift of Hispanic citizens supporting MAG and supporting Trump.
Is this taking advantage of that in South Texas and Rio Grande Valley?
Or is this realignment mainly in the suburbs around the big cities, sir?
It's both.
So, I mean, the Hispanic shift has been aggressively ongoing, obviously, from the last time we did the redistricting.
You know, I mean, what was it, a 30-point swing?
I think nowhere in the country moved more towards President Trump broadly.
You've got the Bronx and you've got South Texas.
So both areas heavily with Hispanic voters.
Obviously, South Texas fully.
And so, or for the most part, of course.
And so that's exactly right, Steve.
So it's both fronts.
I mean, you're able to move the numbers here all over the place.
But you see Newsom's out there because it's interesting, Steve, because the way the Democrats have done it in their states is they, and we talked about it on the show, they've got these community boards and these sort of quote unquote independent groups.
And, you know, it's harder for them to try to combat this, right?
And of course, they've been gerrymandered.
You look at Illinois, you look at California, you look at New York and all these things.
But they have to change their processes.
So Newsom said, hey, I'll take it to the voters.
We'll do a referendum, change the rules, allow the state legislator to gerrymander.
You know, that obviously would be problematic, but it seems to be a little bit of a longer process.
So at least it might be a short-term buffer for us and maybe a longer term battling it out.
But protecting President Trump from, of course, they're open about it.
They'll impeach him and they'll slow everything down with investigations.
We have to prevent this at all costs.
I don't think anyone's worried about things.
Poll numbers go up, they go down.
It's very early.
You know, certainly it's incumbent on Republicans to sell the big, beautiful bill and, you know, the positives in it for New York, largest tax increase, tax cut ever.
You know, no tax on tips, Social Security, a lot of child care provisions that pull very well.
So all Republicans, and I know many of them watch the show, members of Congress, my humble advice, get out there, talk about the economic issues and the results and contrast that with the Democrats.
Results on embrace.
We started, they've had a day with the congressman, the guys in the House, to finally start talking about the Big Beautiful Bill.
We had Jane Zirkle, and yesterday in the 6 o'clock show, we played 21 straight minutes of interview, bang, bang, bang.
And she was asking them, what's the best?
What's the one still work?
They all said, hey, we have to have more rescissions.
We have to have more cuts in spending.
But they talked up the economic advantages.
You just heard Barris and Mitchell would say the same thing.
Outside this self-owner, this fumble with Epstein, it's the economic message that's very powerful.
And you see this in the data, whether it's the tariffs or real wages increasing.
It's not being sold aggressively enough.
If they get on the tip of the, if they start driving that and talk about where this economy is going and the economics of it, it's a message that clearly is going to resonate, particularly with the type of people we have to get out there.
But I just want to reiterate something you said, because I think the Republicans and even the MAGA base are fooling themselves in this.
If you look at what's happening in New York City, right, which is the future of the Democratic Party, right, particularly the Working People's Party and DSA, the ground game they have, and I think this thing in New York City is very serious.
They're not just going to impeach Trump.
They're going to come after criminal charges on everybody.
These people are, this is a combination of neo-Marxism meets radical jihad, and they're the exact opposite end of the spectrum of the MAGA movement.
Sir, your thoughts?
Yeah, you know, I talked about that on the show, I think it was right before I got married, but I've never had more feedback from people.
I mean, literally, I got so many texts from people that watched it.
We did a kind of a deep dive on Lamdami.
You know, they're not building this army, Steve, and sending them home.
You don't build a political machine like this, and then you take the mayorship to the communists, and then you say, okay, everyone, let's go home.
They are building this.
And it wasn't just in the city, Buffalo, Albany.
I mean, cities upstate.
You have red, fully communist type people, DSA folks that are winning in their primaries.
And I think that's really important for people to understand.
We have to be aware of what our political opponents are.
And they're backed by the CCP.
I mean, this stuff is crazy.
We could talk about it all day.
And they are coming for all of us, not just, of course, the president, but any of those and the lovers of power that have stood in the breach.
They will punish all of us.
They are dangerous people, I believe, of course.
Yeah.
Hang on one second.
I just want to hold you for a few minutes on the other side.
Tom Fitton's going to join us, Congressman Mark Harris in the war room.
Here's your host, Stephen K. Mann.
Birch Gold, I think we're going to see a little turbulence.
President Trump doubled down, said, hey, 50 days, the clock's ticking.
I think it's a couple days after Labor Day.
Secondary sanctions, increased sanctions on Russia, but secondary sanctions, that would mean on the Chinese Communist Party, their biggest trading partner.
We're going to have a little turbulence.
I think now is a good time to find out why gold is a hedge against times of financial turbulence and why it's outperformed the S ⁇ P 500 over the last 25 years, you know, like the entire 21st century.
Birchgold.com slash bannon, end of the dollar empire, gets you kicked off.
It's totally free.
And then you can talk to Philip Patrick and the team.
What you need to do is make contact with Philip Patrick and his team to learn all about it.
Birchgold.com.
Given the polling last night of what, and these are, I would say, these are the strong, this alliance they formed of Rasmus and Trafalgar, big data, which was Richard Barris and Insider Advantage, are President Trump's, people would say those are the pollsters that understand President Trump and they're very pro-Trump.
Last night we had Mark Mitchell and today we've had Richard Barris.
You've seen the analysis.
You're a polling fanatic.
What's your takeaway and what then needs to be done, sir?
Thanks, Steve.
So look, I think it's important to set the stage here.
I mean, this is President Trump's Republican Party.
And so it's more unique than past cycles where people have the brand and this and that.
I mean, President Trump built a historic, very unique coalition.
And going into this midterm, of course, it's incumbent on Republicans on the ballot this year, since President Trump is not Senate, House, different down ballot races that we need to lift all boats and work together and maintain President Trump's coalition, right?
He's got MA, he's got Democrats, he's got, you know, it's very unique.
It's not the traditional, you know, Republican sort of voting, voter target base that we're focused on.
And so, you know, all Republican House members really have to think of themselves like, hey, you run a media company.
You know, this is, you have to get content out to the people directly.
You need to educate people on what we're doing.
I think it's impressive that the House and leadership and the president and the Senate, they got this done at the time they did.
And so we've got more time to sell and most importantly, more time to get more recessions, another, you know, big bill to continue to move the needle.
And it's not going to be an overnight quick process.
Everyone's got to be out there hammering on local TV, not just in the Fox, you know, not just in the talking to our own people.
You got to be focused on those sort of low propensity.
I don't want to, you know, low information, you know, people that are living their lives.
They're not really paying attention.
They maybe see the news about Epseen, this and that, and they're kind of wondering, but they need to see the news about the results that President Trump and House of Republicans have delivered.
And things are early.
Polls go up, they go down, see people adjust, people, you know, their strategies.
I mean, it's very early, of course.
And I know that MAGA forces are coalescing a lot of money and resources and strategy to focus on the issues that matter in the Blitz, you know, next year.
But for now, it's really on House members, Senate, you know, get out there like people did yesterday.
I mean, New Media Row, Media Row, and educate voters.
Because I think some people have no idea, Steve.
I mean, I don't know if people know that their taxes got cut if you're in the working class, if you're in the service industry and things like that.
And so when people are aware of that, I think they're very popular.
I mean, this is an American.
Where do they get?
Go ahead.
So to grasp, we just kicked off 2026 with Texas.
We'll spend more time on that.
I want to thank you.
Where do people go to find out more about you, particularly if they want to reach out to you today on this quite brief analysis you've given us, sir?
So if you want to email me at team at at leastforcongress.com and we'll make sure to get all that in because people love reaching out.
But I'm at DeGrasse81 on X, ScatterTruth.
Thank you, Steve.
Thank you to the posse.
We'll gear up and keep this thing going, of course.
Thank you, sir.
You were such a central figure in the last midterm, particularly about all the redistricting.
Got on top of it early, but you have to.
People also should continue to focus on that, and we'll do much more on the situation in New York.
That is the future of the Democratic Party, and it's not only not going to go away, it's going to metastasize.
Very, very serious of what we've allowed to happen.
Tom Finton joins us.
One of the reasons we've allowed this to happen is that we have not taken apart the deep state, which once an empire but is very anti-American.
Tom, you've been all over this, I guess, this broadening criminal investigation, potential investigation that hasn't actually formed up yet to get a special prosecutor, although we understand that may be in the works.
You put out another TikTok this morning.
What is your focus on this thing and what are your concerns?
Well, Radcliffe released this CIA report, and congratulations to the Justice Department and FBI for doing everything they could seemingly over the last two weeks to distract from that.
Confirming, though, that the Obama gang rigged up an intelligence community assessment, high-level speech, top-secret document that was literally designed to launder the Steele Doss CA into the public domain to try to destroy Trump at the beginning of his presidency.
Indeed, it led to criminal investigations, helped lead to the removal of Flynn, et cetera.
And it was all done from the top down.
This was not an intelligence community assessment about the impact of Russia on the elections that kind of brought together traditional analysis.
They made the decision we're going to put the dossier in there.
In fact, the FBI mandated it.
And then you had John Brennan endorse it as well.
And so when you look at this review by Ratcliffe's team, it's clear they put material in there that didn't have any basis to suggest that Putin wanted Trump elected, when in fact there was a basis to suggest that Putin generally was just messing around with us.
And B, he presumed Hillary was going to be president and wanted to impair her.
But instead, they went with the fake lead generated as a result of a joint partnership between the FBI under Obama And the Hillary Clinton campaign to create this dossier and make it a core part of this fake intelligence community assessment, which, by the way, was so sensitive, it was sent out to 200 people in the government almost immediately.
It leaked within 24, 48 hours.
It led to the disclosure and full publication of the Steele report.
And the rest is awful history.
Given the disclosure we've had, and we're going to have Jefferson Morley on tonight about the disclosure about the CIA and knowing well in advance of who Oswald was, and maybe even some contact With some of their front groups, with Oswald wanting to come to work.
You've now had decade after decade after decade.
Why is there some hang-up now for us to go full throttle on this and actually start a significant criminal investigation?
These intelligence services and the FBI have been out of control, and it's obvious they tried to have a – Well, I think the Mueller investigation was a coup.
It was designed to try to throw him out of office, pressure him to remove either through impeachment or through the embarrassment of fake criminal allegations.
It didn't work in the end.
Maybe it did work in part.
He lost the election.
So we can't underplay, you know, the fact that he wasn't prosecuted doesn't mean he, quote, won.
It just means they got their pound of flesh differently.
And so, you know, the CIA reports.
Although our theory at the war room, and we think this needs to be done, we're saying that the intelligence apparatus, he didn't, nobody goes from 63 million votes to 74 million votes and loses.
This thing was absolutely stolen.
The fake ballots of Biden that have never shown up since then was an intelligence apparatus, also.
My point is, yes, I understand.
But my point is, the deep state still has not had a glove laid on them.
And this is, I think, part of the problem I've argued with the Epstein situation.
People want accountability.
Even people that are late to this story and don't know much about Epstein, they think something's murky here.
There are dark forces behind the scenes that are actually calling the shot.
You've been one of the top voices of actually holding this accountable through FOIA requests and through going to court.
And it strikes people as odd that you have to do this so often during President Trump's administration when the deep state is still targeted President Trump for removal.
If President Trump or his people around him don't think the first action the Democrats are going to do on January 3rd or 4th of what, 2027 is to move to impeach him, they're completely wrong.
This is the entire focus is to take Trump down and to break his movement, Tom Fitton.
You know, and you make the good point because President Trump is concerned that there may be people in the list that should not be there whose names will be embarrassed as a result of just guilt by association.
I would suggest that he broaden his thinking on this and recognize this isn't about Epstein.
This is about D.C. corruption.
It's the most readily apparent apolitical example of it because both Democrats and Republicans, when you see 80 percent poll numbers saying people want the Epstein records released, they are on to something politically, right?
And I would hope the politicians here in D.C. follow the lead.
But I tell you, the handling of the Epstein matter by the FBI and the Justice Department further confirmed that they can't be trusted to cross the street on their own.
And I don't think the agencies institutionally are capable of the types of sophisticated, comprehensive, or dare I say, competent criminal investigations, A, into themselves, or B, into agencies like the CIA who were at the center of this grand conspiracy against Trump.
This is why I've said it once, I'll say it again.
President Trump should run the investigations and the prosecutions directly from the White House through a close appointed official who reports directly to him, bring in the best of the best from federal agencies outside of the FBI and DOJ to conduct the investigations and prosecutions if necessary.
And he is the magistrate-in-chief.
He can run it.
He can say, go after this person.
If the law requires, if there's evidence that suggests this person committed a crime, investigate it.
If the evidence is there, investigate it.
Arrest Comey.
He threatened my life.
Prosecute Garland.
He's in contempt of Congress for hiding the Biden Autopen scandal, mainly the audio of his crazed interview with the special counsel Hurr.
He's in contempt for refusing to turn out over in order to protect Joe.
There are all sorts of things he can direct specifically the prosecution of or investigation of.
And it doesn't mean these people aren't protected by the Constitution.
It's the same civil rights protections and civil protections they would have if they were subject to DOJ investigations.
But the DOJ can't do it.
They've got too many James Comeys over there as it is.
The leadership is under siege.
Just with the day-to-day work they have to do to deal with the judicial law affair, that's enough for any Attorney General just to deal with.
Take it off their plate.
They can go to town doing whatever else they need to do in terms of protecting his agenda.
But this law fair, this attack on our republic that we still haven't recovered from needs to be pursued directly by the president.
I just want to go, Tom, if we can just hold you shortly through the break on the other side.
There is some sort of, obviously, investigation going on.
We're seeing leaks about it, about Brennan and other people.
You're arguing it's time to bring that together.
The best way to bring that together, announce a special counsel, let him deal with all of it, right?
And most importantly, given what Mike Davis, the worm, et cetera, have been saying now over the last couple of years, President Trump's Article II powers, right?
Article II powers make it incumbent that that special counsel report to the office of the president and not over to DOJ.
They're fully occupied with defending this presidency and working the mass deportations at the border.
Tom Finton's on deck.
Backing up.
War room.
Use your hook.
Okay, right there.
You see the Honor Guard is getting ready.
The Crown Prince and Prime Minister of Bahrain is going to come for a bylap with the President.
I think there's going to be a press avail.
I remember Brian Glens there.
We're going to cut to that in the 11 o'clock hour as soon as it starts.
Probably he arrives around 11 o'clock.
Let's keep that right there.
Tom Finton, you are so revered in this movement, and for this particular reason, your investigations.
Just give us your thoughts.
Give me a minute or two on where do we go from here.
What's your best recommendation and how we get into a real investigation of the deep state?
Well, on Epstein, it's a relatively straightforward solution.
Just give us the records under FOIA.
Describe what the records are, if they're withholding anything, tell us why.
And there's a court process for it.
If we don't like it, we can challenge it.
But at least it's a transparency that we don't have currently because of this awful memo that was sent out.
They need to change their position on it.
Indeed, we're already in court.
I mean, just last week, they told the court they're looking for and reviewing Epstein records from the FBI and Justice Department.
Just get it done and have a, and the president, my recommendation would be to personally involve himself in this and direct that the FOIA process proceed at pace, meaning quickly.
You know, and on this deep state issue, I think there needs to be a broad investigation initially.
I keep on hearing there's something coming.
Right?
Oh, there's been a referral for the Brennan investigation.
Comey's under investigation.
Why hasn't Comey been arrested?
It's six months into the administration.
It's inexcusable that there hasn't been a comprehensive investigation yet, no matter what its flavor or color, in terms of the FBI or special counsel, into the lawfare against Trump.
They've been circling around it.
And if it's happened, it's a secret.
It's more secretive than the Epstein records.
And I don't believe that you can keep a secret like that secret.
So it ain't happening yet, folks.
It ain't happening.
Now, we're promised it will happen.
But I've, you know, this isn't my first rodeo.
I've heard that before.
Yeah.
We're burning daylight.
It needs to announce a special counsel.
It should report to the office of the president, not to the Justice Department.
Tom, where do people go to get it?
Because you're putting up information all day long, sir.
Where do folks go to get it?
They go to judicialwatch.org, judicialwatch1word.org.
And of course, we're all over social media, both me and Judicial Watch.
We've got 650,000 people supporting us, not just tuning in, writing us checks.
This is one of the broadest grassroots movement against government corruption in the history of the country.
Little old judicial watch.
Nope.
Like I said, my 100-year-old dad, that check he sent Tom Fenton was the one he says got the best return on investment ever.
Tom Fenton, appreciate you, sir.
Keep fighting.
We'll be all over this.
This afternoon, Jefferson Morley is going to the biographer of Angleton is going to join us about this blockbuster story yesterday in the Washington Post.
We'll get all to it.
Congressman Mark Harris joins us now.
Congressman Harris, you're going after the NEA with, why are you picking on the one group that's made American public school education a platinum level that the whole world envies, sir?
Why are you picking on them?
Why are you picking on them, Harris?
Well, Steve, thank you first of all for having me.
I'm very honored to be with you today.
But hey, listen, I think all of the American people agree that the NEA has gone off the rails.
And we're just stepping out today, just completed a press conference just a few minutes ago, declaring that we are moving forward for Congress to actually repeal or take away the charter that the NEA received in 1906.
And when you go back and look at how they started or how that charter was granted, and here we are almost 120 years later, and they have completely, completely gone off the rails.
And I think the American people see it and recognize it.
And I think it's time for Congress to step up and at least take this very, very simple, straightforward action of repealing that charter.
What will happen if and when the charter is repealed?
What will happen?
Well, primarily what it will do is send a message that we are removing the stamp of approval that currently is placed upon anyone that holds this federal charter.
And it sends a message that the NEA has simply become a political machine of leftist activists that have completely become misguided in everything that they were set out to do from the beginning.
And, you know, it doesn't dissolve the NEA.
They certainly have a right to do what they do or exist, but it should certainly remove Congress's seal of approval that would in any way, shape, or form be mistaken.
Is that your number one concern that if you see this New York City race, et cetera, you can see what these folks have done in these grade schools with these young kids to kind of be, to propagandize them, that they're really political operations.
They're not there to just make sure the kids get the best education.
Is that your central beef?
It is.
Our children are not meant to be in school to be brainwashed.
They're sent there to be educated.
And if we are focused more on math and reading and writing, and in fact, I guess that was one of the things that really got my attention in 2019 at their convention.
They had an opportunity, a business item in front of them that basically called for them to, and in fact, just to show your listeners here, it says the National Education Association will rededicate itself to the pursuit of increased student learning in every public school in America by putting a renewed emphasis on quality education.
NEA will make student learning the priority of this association.
And Steve, they voted that down.
And when they can no longer say that they're going to look out for the best interest of students, they become nothing but the opposite.
They oppose parent involvement.
They are brainwashing our children with the things that they are propagating through their political activities.
And furthermore, we can no longer put our stamp of approval on a group.
They're the only labor union, if you will, that is federally recognized.
And we need to step up and say they don't need this charter.
It needs to be taken away.
Congressman, where do people go today, right now, to get more information about your crusade to take the charter away?
Where do they go?
Well, I would encourage them to check out Moms for Liberty.
Moms for Liberty has been one of the key organizations that has been a great inspiration in all of this.
And I would encourage them to check that out because they stood with us in the press conference.
And we've got a number of co-sponsors already for this bill.
And any support and encouragement would be helpful.
Congressman Mark Harris of the great state of North Carolina, thank you, sir.
Thank you for coming on the show and thank you for sponsoring this.
We're going to get everybody to go to the site today and check it out and getting back to you.
So thank you.
Thank you.
Mark Harris of North Carolina, standing up for the children of this nation.
Short commercial break.
▲
Export Selection